> Debian always follows the licenses, and that pedantic correctness is an
attractive factor for many of us.
I'm usually a big fan of pedantic correctness, and yes, in retrospect having
it in main is a cause for concern. My intention was to encourage dialog with
the vendor rather than immediately r
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 10:04:06PM -0600, Walter Landry wrote:
> Adam J. Richter wrote:
> Linus's Linux kernel releases from 2.3.50 through the latest
> test release (2.4.4-pre6) contain GPL-incompatible "firmware" images
> for "EZUSB" devices in linux/drivers/usb/serial/keyspan*fw.h, which
>
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Copyright infringement in linux/drivers/usb/serial/keyspan*fw.h
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 22:49:43 -0700
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 10:04:06PM -0600, Walter Landry wrote:
> > Adam J. Richter wrote:
> > Linus's Linux kernel releases from 2.3.50 through the latest
> i wonder if it would be worth speaking with the people from keyspan/etc. and
> explaining the problem to them? who knows - an appropriately worded message
> (or 10) would probably convince them to release it under a less restrictive
> license. the code itself isn't very useful is it? then again i
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 03:31:45PM +1000, Sam Johnston wrote:
> I'm usually a big fan of pedantic correctness, and yes, in retrospect having
> it in main is a cause for concern. My intention was to encourage dialog with
> the vendor rather than immediately removing it, not necessarily to encourage
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 10:04:06PM -0600, Walter Landry wrote:
> is DFSG compliant or GPL-compatible or not. This also means that
> Debian can't even distribute the original source tar-ball. Debian has
> no permission at all. If no one complains, I'll file bugs against
>
> kernel-source-2.4.0
>
> "Richard" == Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Richard> If you wish to encourage dialog with the vendor, then by
Richard> all means start dialoguing :-) Nothing will happen unless
Richard> someone steps up to fix this, and the more voices the
Richard> better, I th
>> i wonder if it would be worth speaking with the people from keyspan/etc. and
>> explaining the problem to them? who knows - an appropriately worded message
>> (or 10) would probably convince them to release it under a less restrictive
>> license. the code itself isn't very useful is it? then aga
Package: libc6
Version: 2.2.2-4
Severity: normal
This is really an upstream problem I think, so please forward it.
I have checked the source codes in glibc-2.2.2.tar.bz2,
and found that sysdeps/posix/getaddrinfo.c and inet/getnameinfo.c
(both of them are written by Craig Metz) is licensed under
begin Sam Hartman quotation of Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 03:54:38AM -0400:
> We should also talk to the linux-kernel folks and strongly encourage
> them to produce a DFSG free kernel, splitting out any non-free parts
> if necessary.
What's the deal with drivers/net/bsd_comp.c anyway? Unisys isn't ex
10 matches
Mail list logo
