Re: is the license of gsview okay?
From: John Galt <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: is the license of gsview okay?
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 21:26:20 -0700 (MST)
> >GSview uses pstotext in an external DLL. pstotext was written by
> >Andrew Birrell and Paul McJones. It is
> > Copyright (C) 1995-1996, Digital Equipment Corporation.
> >See the licence in pstotext.txt or pstotext.zip for more details.
> locutus:/var/log/snort# apt-cache search pstotext
> pstotext - Extract text from PostScript and PDF files.
> looks like this part's going to be redundant anyway
Ah yes, you are right. I just installed pstotext 1.8g-1.
> >pstoedit is Copyright by Wolfgang Glunz and is licensed with
> >the GNU Public Licence (GPL). Binaries are included in
> >GSview with the permission of Wolfgang Glunz.
> locutus:/usr/src# apt-cache search pstoedit
> pstoedit - PostScript and PDF files to editable vector graphics converter.
I also installed this one just now.
> >I guess the third paragraph seems problematic. pstoedit is
> >under GPL and gsview itself is under AFPL so, generally,
> >they contradict each other. Is it okay because there is the
> >permission of Wolfgang Glunz?
> Why repackage it?
No, no, I do not repackage it ;-) Rather only I did not notice that
these were already packaged.
Thanks for your clarification and sorry for my lack of investigation.
I found that gsview contains only pstotext and it assumes that a system
provides pstoedit. So if one removes redundant pstotext then gsview
is under AFPL, completely same with gs-aladdin.
Thanks again. Regards.
Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
Atsuhito Kohda <email@example.com>
Department of Math., Tokushima Univ.