Re: RFS: inotail -- inotify enhanced tail (updated package)
On 2006-09-24 at 23:58:36 +0200, James Westby <email@example.com> wrote:
> On (24/09/06 18:43), Tobias Klauser wrote:
> > On 2006-09-24 at 17:19:13 +0200, James Westby <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > * You have missed the copyright info for inotify.h in
> > > debian/copyright. There is also no license information for this
> > > file, can you get it and add it?
> > This file was taken from the Linux Kernel source tree and slightly
> > altered (Dropped everything in #ifdef __KERNEL__ as not needed and
> > useful in userspace). So this is licensed under the GPL. Would it
> > suffice to add a notice about this to debian/copyright (plus the
> > copyright information for the same file)? Or might it be better to
> > depend on linux-kernel-headers and take the file from there
> > (/usr/include/linux/inotify.h)?
> It is fine to lift this file and keep it in your package, but if you do
> then it needs appropriate license information. This must then be
> documented in debian/copyright.
I'll add the following notice to debian/copyright:
The files inotify.h and inotify-syscalls.h were taken from the source
tree of the linux kernel and slightly altered. Both are licensed under
the terms of the GNU General Public License v2.
Copyright (C) 2005 John McCutchan
Is that sufficent?
To make sure I'll also add a notice to the headers in the next upstream
.''`. Tobias Klauser - Debian enthusiast
: :' : <email@example.com>
`. `'` GPG-Key: 0x3A445520