-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Ralf Wildenhues on 8/29/2007 3:13 PM:
> Hello Brett,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
Likewise.
>
> * Brett Smith wrote on Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 09:47:18PM CEST:
> Not the only one, but for another stable release (1.10.1), I don't think
> muc
This is the first I've seen on this thread.
I have heard that GPLv3 is viral/invasive.
The short question I have is:
If automake/autoconf use GPLv3, will I be able to use them for packages
that are NOT GPLv3?
IE, if GPLv3 is viral/invasive, I cannot use software covered by GPLv3
for most of t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Harlan Stenn on 8/29/2007 8:59 PM:
> This is the first I've seen on this thread.
>
> I have heard that GPLv3 is viral/invasive.
No more so than GPLv2 was, and hopefully less so. That was part of the
reason GPLv3 went through such a long
Eric,
Sounds good - thanks very much!
H
___
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
On 8/29/07, Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > The short question I have is:
> >
> > If automake/autoconf use GPLv3, will I be able to use them for packages
> > that are NOT GPLv3?
>
> The goal is YES. Remember, with autoconf 2.61 and automake 1.10, bo
Hello Benoit,
* Benoit SIGOURE wrote on Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 09:55:36AM CEST:
> On Aug 25, 2007, at 8:28 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >
> >I think it's some zsh version that provokes
> >the above warning, at least that's where I've seen it before.
>
> You're right, it's ZSH 4.2.6 that is buggy on
