From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: Question about multiple licenses
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 16:57:47 +0200
Message-ID: <87h8wiy0ic.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <681c721c.AEQAPExWoDUAAAAAAAAAAAOtZhgAAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZoSX-@mailjet.com>
	<87mv6kj7i7.fsf@gmail.com> <873786zlsb.fsf@albion.it.manchester.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37504)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1dosrG-0002Tn-Sf
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2017 11:01:43 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1dosq2-0008LU-2b
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2017 11:00:14 -0400
In-Reply-To: <873786zlsb.fsf@albion.it.manchester.ac.uk> (Dave Love's message
	of "Fri, 01 Sep 2017 12:43:48 +0100")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Dave Love <fx@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Dave Love <fx@gnu.org> skribis:

> Alex Vong <alexvong1995@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Based on the above general argument, I think we should list all the
>> licenses instead of just GPLv2+ since it would be inaccurate to say that
>> the whole program is under just GPLv2+.
>
> Indeed.  Not only do you need to list the licences (according to all
> "legal advice" I've seen for distributions), but normally also
> distribute the relevant licence texts, even for permissive licences if
> they require that (e.g. BSD).  I raised this recently, as it's not
> generally being done, so some Guix binary packages appear to be
> copyright-infringing.

There=E2=80=99s no such thing as a =E2=80=9CGuix binary package=E2=80=9D th=
ough, which makes it
different from traditional distros.

In Guix a package is a Scheme object that refers to the source and build
method of upstream software.

One can always view the COPYING file by running, say:

  tar xf $(guix build -S glibc) glibc-2.25/COPYING

This is of course suboptimal because the exact incantation varies from
package to package (in some cases there=E2=80=99s no such file.)

Thoughts?

Ludo=E2=80=99.