Re: A message from CMake upstream: announcing dh-cmake
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: A message from CMake upstream: announcing dh-cmake
- From: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 13:05:12 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <8469811.VszcyU8jI2@tonks> <email@example.com> <1631961.4oqYP2Pffo@tonks> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
On 06.07.18 22:00, Colin Watson wrote:
> If the libraries in question are DFSG-free themselves, there's no DFSG
> issue and you don't need to remove them from the tarball (and we'd
> generally encourage not modifying the upstream tarball unnecessarily for
> upload to Debian). The policy about bundling is separate from the DFSG.
> Of course it'd be incumbent on whoever's doing the Debian upload to
> actually check the licensing status.
last time i've packaged vtk, I removed them (at least those that either
already had been packaged or easy to do so), in order to make sure that
nothing in that really complex cmake file can even try build/use any
piece of them.
the package was just meant for an inhouse installation for my client,
so i didn't care much about policies and orig tarball handling - I've
just patched directly in the git repo.
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
firstname.lastname@example.org -- +49-151-27565287