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

Antique RC bugs (many about licensing)

I went through the RC bugs which apply to etch and are older than one year.
This is a rather disturbing list, as you would expect from the age of the bugs.
In most cases I don't think you can expect the maintainers to deal with these
bugs on their own.

What are the release managers planning to do about these?

First the easy bugs:

Package: libuclibc0 (optional; David Schleef) [uclibc/0.9.27-1 ; =] [add/edit comment]
261725 [           ] libuclibc0 - violates FHS

This deserves a long-term exception because the FHS has no reasonable alternative
placement, and tools expect the placement used here.

Package: libmpeg2-4 (optional; Loic Minier et al.) [mpeg2dec/0.4.0b-4 ; =] [add/edit comment]
 14-Aug-2005: Andi: is sarge-ignore; discussion about permanent exception
268603 [           ] libmpeg2-4: Non-PIC shared library

This almost certainly should have a permanent exception.

Now the remaining non-licensing bugs:
Package: evolution (optional; Debian Evolution Maintainers et al.) [evolution/ ; =] [add/edit comment]
295270 [           ] Messages cannot be deleted and index file gets corrupted when there isn't enough disk space

Not solved yet, but an upstream dataloss bug.

Package: harbour (optional; Luis Mayoral) [harbour/0.44-1 ; =] [add/edit comment]
276962 [           ] harbour: FTBFS on amd64: harbour hangs on run.

Maintainer appears MIA.  Suggest forced orphaning and removal from etch.  Bug appears
to be fixed upstream in a new version.

Package: libparted1.6-13 (optional; RFHed) [parted/ ; =] [add/edit comment]
294520 [ +         ] libparted1.6-13: Incorrect handling of extended partitions

Shouldn't be marked as "patch"; it's not solved yet.

Package: mozilla-calendar (optional; Takuo KITAME) [mozilla/2:1.7.12-1.1 ; =] [add/edit comment]
293962 [           ] mozilla-calendar: mozilla segfaults on AMD64 when using a remote ICS calendar


Package: nvidia-glx (optional; non-free; Randall Donald) [nvidia-graphics-drivers/1.0.8178-2 ; =] [add/edit comment]
208198 [           ] nvidia-glx: dangling symlink libGL.so left from xlibmesa-gl-dev without nvidia-glx-dev installed

This problem seems to be exceptionally hard to solve.

Package: xdelta (optional; LaMont Jones) [xdelta/1.1.3-6.1 ; =] [add/edit comment]
147187 [           ] xdelta: Deltas generated on i386 fail to apply on alpha

This package should be forcibly orphaned and removed from etch; there are very few
packages which depend on it anyway.

Potentially ignorable licensing bugs:

Package: alcovebook-sgml-doc (optional; Yann Dirson) [alcovebook-sgml/0.1.2-7 ; =] [add/edit comment]
266407 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:GFDL] reference manual is licensed under GFDL
321771 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:OPL] alcovebook-intro is licensed under OPL 1.0

These may actually be invalid; the license situation on this is confused.
They may further be rendered invalid by the recent GR?  I haven't checked.

Package: xserver-xorg (optional; Debian X Strike Force et al.) [xorg-x11/6.9.0.dfsg.1-4 ; =] [add/edit comment]
211765 [           ] xfree86: material under GLX Public License and SGI Free Software License B is not DFSG-free

As far as I can tell, the philosophy of the most recent GR is that Debian should 
look for the "spirit" of the license -- and assume that licensors don't really 
mean what they say when they say things which contradict the spirit.  While I 
think this is legally stupid, it is exactly what Adeoato said when he said that 
he didn't believe that the GFDL actually contained the restrictions on encryption 
etc. which it contains if read literally.

Following the same philosophy, Debian might conclude that the authors of these 
licenses don't really mean what they said, so this bug may be invalid.  I don't
really know.

Package: libnss-ldap (extra; Stephen Frost) [libnss-ldap/238-1.1 ; =] [add/edit comment]
199810 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:RFC] Includes non-free documentation (RFC2307)

More unmodifiable material.  The "do what I mean not what I say" philosophy promoted
by the recent GR may mean that this should not be considered unmodifiable, however.
I'm not sure.

Now the remaining licensing bugs:

Package: cpp (standard; Debian GCC Maintainers et al.) [gcc-defaults/1.30 ; =] [add/edit comment]
200003 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:UNMODIFIABLE] cpp: contains non-free manpages
Package: cpp-4.0-doc (required; Debian GCC Maintainers et al.) [gcc-4.0/4.0.2-9 ; 4.0.2-10] [add/edit comment]
321781 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:GFDL1.1ol] contains non-free documentation
Package: gnat-4.0-doc (required; Debian GCC Maintainers et al.) [gcc-4.0/4.0.2-9 ; 4.0.2-10] [add/edit comment]
321782 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:GFDL1.2olfc] contains non-free documentation
Package: libstdc++6-4.0-doc (required; Debian GCC Maintainers et al.) [gcc-4.0/4.0.2-9 ; 4.0.2-10] [add/edit comment]
321780 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:GFDL1.1] contains non-free documentation

These bugs were reconfirmed as RC by the recent GR.  Matthias Klose
has said he's working on them -- and in fact that he can just flip a switch to
remove them.  I don't know why he hasn't done so yet.

Package: emacs21 (optional; Rob Browning) [emacs21/21.4a-3 ; =] [add/edit comment]
207932 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:UNMODIFIABLE] emacs21: Includes non-free documents

These are not FDL documents, they're just plain unmodifiable documents, and it's quite
clear they're intended to be that way.

The maintainer here has so far refused to address the bug at all.  I believe it is
past time to remove emacs21 from etch, or to remove the maintainer from the package.

Package: gdb (standard; Daniel Jacobowitz) [gdb/6.4-1 ; =] [add/edit comment]
212522 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:GFDL1.1olisfcbc] gdb package contains non-free GNU FDL documentation

Reconfirmed as RC by the recent GR (this has invariant sections).  Daniel said
in January that he'd remove the manual in March (which is now).  Nag sent to bug trail.

Package: glibc (required; GNU Libc Maintainers et al.) [glibc/2.3.5-13 ; 2.3.6-3] [add/edit comment]
181494 [           ] [NONFREE-DOC:GFDL1.1olisfcbc] includes non-free documentation

Reconfirmed as RC by the recent GR (this has invariant sections).  I do not know what is
being done about this bug if anything.  We obviously can't remove glibc.  The
reference manual and manpages, however, must be removed.  The glibc maintainers have
been fairly derelict with regard to this -- look at that bug number!

Package: hasciicam (optional; Christian Surchi) [hasciicam/0.9.1-1.2 ; =] [add/edit comment]
292231 [ +         ] [NONFREE-DOC:GFDL1.1] making the entire manpage invariant is not consistent with the DFSG

Needs an upload of the new version, which apparently has a no-invariant
GFDL license.  Maintainer appears to be MIA; orphan and remove from etch?

Package: imagemagick (optional; Ryuichi Arafune) [imagemagick/6: ; =] [add/edit comment]
214623 [           ] [NONFREE-DATA:UNMODFIABLE] Non-free logo included in source

This appears to be a matter of the maintainer not paying attention, because
the non-free logo has been removed from the binary.  NMU?

Nathanael Nerode  <neroden@twcny.rr.com>

Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...

Reply to: