From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: [PACKAGE] musl libc Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 09:46:33 +0200 Message-ID: <87ziof23om.fsf@elephly.net> References: <87mvkhbxyi.fsf@elephly.net> <87k2flauav.fsf@elephly.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42061) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bYq8B-0003W5-0g for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 Aug 2016 03:46:51 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bYq84-0003s6-EQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 Aug 2016 03:46:49 -0400 Received: from sender163-mail.zoho.com ([74.201.84.163]:24976) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bYq84-0003rN-6B for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 Aug 2016 03:46:44 -0400 In-reply-to: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: David Craven Cc: guix-devel David Craven writes: >> But where does the disambiguation choice to expat come from ? > > I'm no expert, but I think that the difference is only in that the x11 > license has an amendment. Correct. I looked at the actual license in the COPYRIGHT file and it looked like Expat, not like X11. (In Guix we don’t use the name “MIT”, because it is ambiguous.) I added a comment to point at the COPYRIGHT file for details of the third-party pieces under non-copyleft licenses. ~~ Ricardo