On Sun, 8 May 2005, Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > Could someone throw me a cluebat here? I've found a patch that is needed > for the sparc architecture and kbd-1.12 (Build fails with: > kbdrate.c:167: error: structure has no member named `period') > > The patch I've found is placed under two licenses it seems. How do we > usually handle something like this? Here's the patch header: > > # --- T2-COPYRIGHT-NOTE-BEGIN --- > # This copyright note is auto-generated by ./scripts/Create-CopyPatch. > # > # T2 SDE: package/.../kbd/kbdrate-sparc.patch > # Copyright (C) 2004 - 2005 The T2 SDE Project > # Copyright (C) 1998 - 2004 ROCK Linux Project > # > # More information can be found in the files COPYING and README.
I've no experience of T2, but Rock seem to add copyrights for 'infrastructure' they generate, e.g. descriptions of what stuff does. This is not a problem in itself, they have a right to assert ownership for whatever they contribute. It's the _license_ of the copyright (e.g. bsd, gpl, lgpl, mit, other) that matters. Occasionally, people try to add inappropriate terms, but you would need to look at the details to determine that. Ken -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
