[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: fedora-extras-list
Subject: Re: iscan license question
From: Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler () chello ! at>
Date: 2006-01-26 22:45:29
Message-ID: loom.20060126T234325-603 () post ! gmane ! org
[Download RAW message or body]
> > > > Don't include any binary only bits, and we dodge the iffy RE clause.
> > > Which is what I'll do and make a similar package for livna, including
only
> > > the binary parts.
> >
> > That seems like the best plan of action.
>
> Would be, if iscan could be packaged that way. Unfortunately, it still
requires
> a non-free, binary-only library libesmod.so.1. So, is it OK to package that
> library even if we don't have its source?
IMHO, this would blatantly violate Fedora Extras guidelines. Why don't you just
package the whole thing for Livna or somewhere else? I doubt it would be usable
without the binary stuff anyway, so what's the point of putting unusable libs
into Extras?
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic