Re: [RFH] Re: RFS: jedi-sdl
Thanks Vincent,
> So this package is in complete violation of the LGPL, since, unless I
> am very much mistaken (which could very well be, I haven't read the LGPL
> in ages) derivatives of LGPLed work should be LGPL or GPL.
>
I actually agree with you, this is re-written LGPL code, which must be
LGPL (at least). I guess I learned to not trust an upstream author's
word on licensing . . .
Should this be reported to the SDL project as a possible license violation?
I'm withdrawing the RFS unless someone else has more information on this.
[FYI, Vincent, here are the answers to your questions]
> I'm currently having a look into it, since it's my fault somehow (I
> filed the gearhead bug). I'm hitting a serious problem straightaway for
> me: is there any compelling reason why it is i386 only ? (I'm on amd64,
> and not very eager to setup pbuilders with arch = i386).
It's an old package the relied on kylix's libc package, which is now
deprecated and only available for i386
It's explained here [1,2]. I tried using other packages, but they were
not available in Debian and would require a bit of rewriting.
> In short, you're missing for a thorough check of licenses and so on.
I should have cleaned them out, they are not linked for the units I
included. A repackaged orig.tar.gz is probably necessary.
[1] http://www.stack.nl/~marcov/porting.pdf
[2] http://wiki.freepascal.org/libc_unit
Reply to: