Hi
On Friday, 19. April 2002 11:53, Tille, Andreas wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 01:45:19PM +0200, Andreas Tille
wrote:
> > Unfortunately it may not be quite so free. I haven't checked
> > it in detail, but I'm told the only decent sound support is
> > of dubious license status.
It seems that in the directory sound, there are some files
(fmopl.cpp, mixer.cpp and some of the .h files) which do not
carry a GPL statement. So, maybe you should ask the upstrem
author(s) to clarify this.
> Could anybody please sort out whether it is possible to split
> it into
>
> main/scummvm
Are there any DFSG free SCUMM adventures around? To me, this
looks similar to the situation of lxdoom, which is in contrib.
> non-free/scummvom-sound
This seems not a good idea. If the parts in question are really
non-free, they must not be linked with GPLed code. So if they
are scummvm-specific, they cannot go into non-free, either.
cu,
Thomas
}:o{#
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
