Bug#362920: Bug#362884: Bug#362920: cvs - X11R7.0 incompatibilities
On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 19:24 +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 07:17:40PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 02:24:21AM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> > > Painfully, we may have to proceed without freetype support in Xprint
> > > after all.
> >
> > AIUI, the non-freeness issue I raised on xorg-modular, would certainly
> > violate the DFSG?
I missed your message at xorg-modular, when did you make it?
> For reference, the upstream copyright file:
> http://webcvs.freedesktop.org/xorg/xc/extras/ttf2pt1/COPYRIGHT?view=markup
>
> I misremembered (confusing it with the stupid libXaw copyright issue):
> it's not actually DFSG-non-free, but just GPL-incompatible IIRC --
> advertising clause.
Yes, that's right, just the advertising clause. My guess is they
generically grabbed the BSD licence at the time. A nice solution would
be if ttf2pt1 changed their licence to modern BSD. I might ask them.
> Though the Type1 assembler is one of those
> 'licences are easy, I'll just write one myself' types. :\
>
Cool! Thanks for volunteering to do it ;)
> > This will all clear up much more easily once Debian has upgraded to
> > X11R7.1.
>
> Right. Given they're modules, an upload of just the newer versions of
> x11proto-fixes and libxfont could be done? This is, after all, the
> Grand Unified New Modular Reality. :)
It'd be nice if that's true, and it would make sense. Older xserver
code simply wouldn't use the two new xfixes functions. However someone
at #xorg said he wasn't sure it was that simple, and that it might
destabilise the system. I can't judge whether he is being overly
pessimistic or not.
I'm all for uploading the newer Fixes and Font if it's safe to do so.
Drew
Reply to: