On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 13:35 +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > > For that to work, you'd have to somehow indicate which files' licenses > are going to be relevant to which binary package. For instance, many > packages have (parts of the) build-system machinery GPL'd (e.g. the > ltmain.sh from libtool is GPL-2+), but the rest of the package uses a > laxer license (e.g. LGPL). I'm fairly sure that ltmain.sh has a GPL exception stating that things output by that script are not GPL'd. A build tool that pollutes the licence of what its used to build would be rather problematic - do you have any actual examples? -Rob
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part