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

Bug#479097: marked as done (License statement for bbm fonts: Not indicated in file on CTAN)

Your message dated Mon, 24 Jul 2017 09:10:01 +0900
with message-id <[🔎] 20170724001001.jcfkvtdekzszssm7@bulldog.preining.info>
and subject line Closing
has caused the Debian Bug report #479097,
regarding License statement for bbm fonts: Not indicated in file on CTAN
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
479097: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=479097
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: texlive-fonts-extra
Version: 2007.dfsg.1-2
Severity: serious

I had a closer look at the bbm issue already raised in an other bug (in
Cc), which we thought was fixed, however it is not. There are two
related bbm directories on CTAN, one for the macros (license LPPL), one
for the fonts themselves by a different author. The file readme.bbm,
mentioned in the other bug report, only refers to the macros.

The fonts do also have a file bbm.readme, which is very old. From the
wording it seems that the fonts are intended to be free, but there is no
explicit license statement at all.

By the way, I found this while I wanted to document and register our
knowledge that bbm is free in the catalogue. It turns out that it is
really useful to check the package against its tpm file, because you
find cases like this, were different files are covered by a license than
you thought...

Regards, Frank

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
  APT prefers stable
  APT policy: (500, 'stable'), (99, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-6-686
Locale: LANG=de_DE@euro, LC_CTYPE=de_DE@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)

Versions of packages texlive-fonts-extra depends on:
ii  texlive-base                  2007-14    TeX Live: Essential programs and f
ii  texlive-common                2007-14    TeX Live: Base component

Versions of packages texlive-fonts-extra recommends:
pn  texlive-fonts-extra-doc       <none>     (no description available)
ii  texpower                      0.2-2      Macros for creating professional p

Versions of packages tex-common depends on:
ii  debconf                      1.5.11etch1 Debian configuration management sy
ii  ucf                          2.0020      Update Configuration File: preserv

Versions of packages texlive-fonts-extra is related to:
pn  tetex-base                    <none>     (no description available)
ii  tetex-bin                     2007-14    TeX Live: teTeX transitional packa
ii  tetex-extra                   2007-14    TeX Live: teTeX transitional packa
ii  tex-common                    1.10       common infrastructure for building

-- debconf information:
  tex-common/check_texmf_wrong:
  tex-common/check_texmf_missing:

-- 
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
We are not keeping bugs open for things were we don't have influence
over. Whether the license statement is uploaded to CTAN or not is
not of concern.

Closing this bug.

Norbert

--
PREINING Norbert                               http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc.     +    JAIST     +    TeX Live     +    Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13   fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13

--- End Message ---
Reply to: