On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 11:47:34AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Note that since you are creating an embedded system, the size of all
> these files may be an issue. I believe you could legally supply them
> separately as long as they are supplied in the same distribution
As long as we have stuff
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 11:47:34AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
>>Note that since you are creating an embedded system, the size of all
>>these files may be an issue. I believe you could legally supply them
>>separately as long as they are supplied in the same distribution
>
Josh Triplett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's true, but it seems pretty unlikely that an embedded system would
> have any documentation installed.
Lots of embedded systems would like to be able to use the Debian
packages more or less whole -- and then remove things like
/usr/share/doc if the
Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Josh Triplett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> That seems a bit harsh; I think sarge would be quite usable for this
>> purpose, as long as you avoid GFDLed bits. Is there anything GFDLed in
>> Debian that isn't in /usr/share/{doc,info,man} ?
>
>
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:52:36 + Rich Walker wrote:
> Would it make sense to add a License: field to the status information
> available to dpkg?
IMHO, no.
Because the Freeness status of a package is far more complex than a
single license name.
Many times you have works under different licenses
ANNO IV N°24
DIC
2004
. ASSISTENZ
6 matches
Mail list logo
