Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Robin H.Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>
To: Jon Portnoy <avenj@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Ebuild license question
Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 20:27:51
Message-Id: 20030509202749.GC27773@cherenkov.orbis-terrarum.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Ebuild license question by Jon Portnoy
1 On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 04:21:06PM -0400, Jon Portnoy wrote:
2 > > Instead of creating a new libcap license file, I think we should
3 > > abstract the package name in PAM/PWDB and point all 3 items to this.
4 > > Possible name is $PORTAGE/licenses/BSD_GPL
5 > Dual licenses are usually done like:
6 >
7 > LICENSE="BSD GPL-2"
8 >
9 > Any reason that wouldn't apply here?
10 I asked because PAM and PWDB seem to have their own license files rather
11 than that common dual license solution. If you look at their license
12 files, there is a single additional clause in addition to the BSD/GPL-2
13 licenses to make them compatible together (otherwise according to FSF
14 they aren't).
15
16 --
17 Robin Hugh Johnson
18 E-Mail : robbat2@××××××××××××××.net
19 Home Page : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2
20 ICQ# : 30269588 or 41961639
21 GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85