[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GPL-2-only packages using GPL-3+ readline

In general, this license clash doesn't seem to be a strictly downstream issue. 
Perhaps you should file bugs with the upstream projects to either revise their 
licensing if they can or explicitly depend on libeditreadline-dev, especially 
for the projects that fail to build with it.

I think you would offer more to say on the dilemma than individual package 
maintainers, unless your findings were machine-driven going off, say, debian/
copyright (then validating the entries could be left up to them).

In any case I appreciate the digging you've done.

> maxima
Check the maxima-sage package too; they have their own source package because 
they need a build with a different Lisp implementation, and splitting into two 
source packages had proved easier than not.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: