Bug#820165: RFS: libretro-genesisplusgx/1.7.4+git20160330 [ITP]
control: owner -1 !
control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Sergio, the copyright needs a complete rework.
BSD-2 BSD-3 BSD zlib/libpng GPL-2 are only some of the missing licenses.
please take care of them.
sdl looks like an embedded library to me
also tremor
copyright holders are missing
./sdl/fileio.c: * Copyright (C) 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Charles Mac Donald
./sdl/fileio.h: * Copyright (C) 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Charles Mac Donald
./sdl/unzip.h: Copyright (C) 1998 Gilles Vollant
or dates are wrong
./core/tremor/block.c: * THE OggVorbis 'TREMOR' SOURCE CODE IS (C) COPYRIGHT 1994-2002 *
./core/tremor/block.h: * THE OggVorbis 'TREMOR' SOURCE CODE IS (C) COPYRIGHT 1994-2008 *
you list this copyright for tremor
Copyright: 2002 Xiph.org Foundation
EkeEke is owner of many other copyrights in the source code
Files: core/ntsc/*
core/ntsc/*
listed twice
./sdl/unzip.h: Copyright (C) 1998 Gilles Vollant
can't you use libretro from new queue?
std-version is 3.9.8 now
the other stuff looks good to me.
g.
Il Giovedì 7 Aprile 2016 16:36, PICCORO McKAY Lenz <mckaygerhard@gmail.com> ha scritto:
well, my purpose its made a hack, regarding in the unclear issue, lets see:
mame now its gpl...
genesisplus its mame license
then all its gpl?
jejeje
Lenz McKAY Gerardo (PICCORO)
http://qgqlochekone.blogspot.com
2016-04-06 22:24 GMT-04:30 Sérgio Benjamim <sergio_br2@yahoo.com.br>:
> Yeah, right, it may confuse people. I changed that in Copyright. Take a look
> again.
>
>
> cheers,
> sergio-br2
>
>
>
> On 06/04/2016 11:36, PICCORO McKAY Lenz wrote:
>>
>> 2016-04-06 9:37 GMT-04:30 Sergio benjamim Rocha filho
>> <sergio_br2@yahoo.com.br>:
>>>
>>> MAME changed its license, but Genesis Plus GX uses the old one.
>>> Also, it's based on some portions of old mame code:
>>> https://github.com/ekeeke/Genesis-Plus-GX/blob/master/LICENSE.txt#L7
>>
>> i already know, ok i not explain too much, but ...
>>
>> i suggested to better put licence as only non-commercial due makes
>> more confused if put "mame" as licensed due now are gpl
>
>
Reply to: