On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 04:17 +0300, Sami Liedes wrote: > I grepped the source tarballs in Lenny (testing) main section for the > note "DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE - it is generated by Glade." which > indicates the file is generated using the Glade UI editor. Then I > checked if these packages have any *.glade* files, which would be the > Glade projects, i.e. the "source code" (at least in the GPL sense, > "preferred form of modification") for these. For those of these > packages for which this is not a false alarm, I believe this would > fail DFSG #2, and for those being licensed under GPL, it would > probably make them non-distributable. No. It would just mean that Glade was used to *originally* create the file but then the file *has* been modified (many, many times) but the warning simply hasn't been removed. Glade no longer even generates the C files. Glade-2 did, Glade-3 does not. (Try it, load glade-3, create a .glade file and try to get the interface.c, support.c and callbacks.c source code files.) Therefore, no matter what the C files say, it is no longer possible to generate the C files using the current version of Glade and the C files MUST be the preferred form for modification! I'm sorry, but it appears that you have misunderstood Glade. > I haven't filed bugs for any of these, save for tangogps which was the > first case I encountered and after which I got the idea to do this. I do not think that any bugs are appropriate here. The behaviour you seek to utilise has been removed from the program that you assert as the generator of the preferred form. > gpe-contacts > support.c > support.h Absolute false positive - the C files have been heavily modified by hand. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part