PyPy license correction (wrt bundled libraries)

pypy and pypy3 license metadata have been corrected from: MIT and Python and UCD to: MIT and Python and UCD and BSD and (ASL 2.0 or BSD) # PyPy is MIT # Python standard library is Python # pypy/module/unicodedata is UCD # Bundled pycparser is is BSD # Bundled pycparser.ply is BSD # Bundled

Re: bundled libraries

both) otherwise, it's not working. Best Regards, Didier FABERT. In my opinion, using bundled libraries in a private directory is the best choice now, both in Fedora and EPEL. Different patched/bundled libraries could be frequently used. -- --- Antonio Trande Fedora Project mailto: sagi

Re: bundled libraries

egards, Didier FABERT. Le 24/12/2020 à 15:01, Antonio T. sagitter a écrit : Bundled libraries are permitted as long as they do not conflict with system libraries. In your case, it does not happen in Fedora but in EPEL it does; so i would advice you to use a private lib directory in EPEL where bu

Re: bundled libraries

Bundled libraries are permitted as long as they do not conflict with system libraries. In your case, it does not happen in Fedora but in EPEL it does; so i would advice you to use a private lib directory in EPEL where bundled .so libraries (generally unversioned libraries) will be installed

Re: bundled libraries

On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 8:18 AM Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 1:45 AM Didier Fabert wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Yes the guidelines are clear for fedora. I miss tell that the package is >> present in fedora and epel repos and my question is more like this: >> >> Is it possible to mix

Re: bundled libraries

Hi, Thank you very much Richard. Best Regards, Didier FABERT. Le 24/12/2020 à 14:17, Richard Shaw a écrit : On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 1:45 AM Didier Fabert > wrote: Hi, Yes the guidelines are clear for fedora. I miss tell that the package is pre

Re: bundled libraries

On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 1:45 AM Didier Fabert wrote: > Hi, > > Yes the guidelines are clear for fedora. I miss tell that the package is > present in fedora and epel repos and my question is more like this: > > Is it possible to mix bundled/system libs ? like using system libs (the > must part in

Re: bundled libraries

Hi, Yes the guidelines are clear for fedora. I miss tell that the package is present in fedora and epel repos and my question is more like this: Is it possible to mix bundled/system libs ? like using system libs (the must part in guidelines) for fedora packages and use bundled one for epel p

Re: bundled libraries

On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 2:11 AM Didier Fabert wrote: > Hi, > > How to deal with package which add new cool feature, but unfortunately > by adding bundled (static) libraries ? > > 1. I do nothing, this feature cannot be included this way > 2. I can add the feature because libraries are statically

bundled libraries

Hi, How to deal with package which add new cool feature, but unfortunately by adding bundled (static) libraries ? 1. I do nothing, this feature cannot be included this way 2. I can add the feature because libraries are statically linked 3. I can add the feature anyway if I declare bundled libs

Re: Licensing of the bundled libraries

Michal Schorm wrote: > Hello, > > Q: > Is it needed to explicitly list (or pack) license (files) of a library > that a package bundles? [1] > And if yes, what's the right way to do so? > > The built package only contain 1 binary (and it's manpage and license > file). In this case - when no sourc

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Licensing of the bundled libraries

On 2019-09-18, Michal Schorm wrote: > Is it needed to explicitly list (or pack) license (files) of a library > that a package bundles? [1] If the bundled library code is part of the binary package, then yes, you need to list and to package the license. > And if yes, what's the right way to do so

Licensing of the bundled libraries

Hello, Q: Is it needed to explicitly list (or pack) license (files) of a library that a package bundles? [1] And if yes, what's the right way to do so? The built package only contain 1 binary (and it's manpage and license file). In this case - when no sources are packed - I'd understand that it i

Re: upstream dev. asks suggestions about howto make packagers work easier (bundled libraries, etc.)

Il 20/11/2016 21:38, Nico Kadel-Garcia ha scritto: >> I think it would be nice to make a discussion even for non Python >> packages, so we can elaborate a sort of vademecum that a packager >> could show to upstreams when there is a collaboration between them. >> >> Have a nice day > Most upstream d

Re: upstream dev. asks suggestions about howto make packagers work easier (bundled libraries, etc.)

On 21 November 2016 at 21:49, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 4:42 AM, Piotr Ozarowski wrote: >> In Debian we have https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamGuide >> I guess more official, cross-distro document that we all point upstream >> authors to would be a nice idea as well. > > It would

Re: upstream dev. asks suggestions about howto make packagers work easier (bundled libraries, etc.)

Il 20/11/2016 21:38, Nico Kadel-Garcia ha scritto: >> I think it would be nice to make a discussion even for non Python >> packages, so we can elaborate a sort of vademecum that a packager >> could show to upstreams when there is a collaboration between them. >> >> Have a nice day > Most upstream d

Re: upstream dev. asks suggestions about howto make packagers work easier (bundled libraries, etc.)

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 4:42 AM, Piotr Ozarowski wrote: > Hi, > > [Germano Massullo, 2016-11-20] >> We often deal with upstream developers that bundle libraries in their >> code, so to make a package we have to debundle them, etc. >> This time, an upstream dev. asked me what he could do to make ea

Re: upstream dev. asks suggestions about howto make packagers work easier (bundled libraries, etc.)

On Nov 20, 2016 1:49 AM, "Germano Massullo" wrote: > > We often deal with upstream developers that bundle libraries in their > code, so to make a package we have to debundle them, etc. > This time, an upstream dev. asked me what he could do to make easier > the work of packagers. > In this case th

Re: upstream dev. asks suggestions about howto make packagers work easier (bundled libraries, etc.)

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Germano Massullo wrote: > We often deal with upstream developers that bundle libraries in their > code, so to make a package we have to debundle them, etc. > This time, an upstream dev. asked me what he could do to make easier > the work of packagers. > In this cas

Re: upstream dev. asks suggestions about howto make packagers work easier (bundled libraries, etc.)

On Sun, 2016-11-20 at 15:42 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > I think it comes down to: > - don't bundle, > - if you have to bundle, provide an easy and unambiguous configure > switch >   to use the system version of the dependency, > - never, never, patch stuff in-tree. - Don't hard-cod

Re: upstream dev. asks suggestions about howto make packagers work easier (bundled libraries, etc.)

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 08:48:27AM +0100, Germano Massullo wrote: > We often deal with upstream developers that bundle libraries in their > code, so to make a package we have to debundle them, etc. > This time, an upstream dev. asked me what he could do to make easier > the work of packagers. > In

upstream dev. asks suggestions about howto make packagers work easier (bundled libraries, etc.)

We often deal with upstream developers that bundle libraries in their code, so to make a package we have to debundle them, etc. This time, an upstream dev. asked me what he could do to make easier the work of packagers. In this case the software is python-netjsongraph [1] that bundles javascript-d3

Re: Bundled libraries

https://github.com/aerospike/aerospike-server/tree/master/modules > > > > Do the jansson, jemalloc and luajit fall under the purview of "bundled > > libraries" ? > > > > Well, given that all of these are packaged in Fedora you need a FPC > exception if you

Re: Bundled libraries

On 08/01/15 18:07, Anshu Prateek wrote: hi, I am trying to package aerospike. It uses some of libraries as modules / git sub-modules. https://github.com/aerospike/aerospike-server/tree/master/modules Do the jansson, jemalloc and luajit fall under the purview of "bundled libraries"

Bundled libraries

hi, I am trying to package aerospike. It uses some of libraries as modules / git sub-modules. https://github.com/aerospike/aerospike-server/tree/master/modules Do the jansson, jemalloc and luajit fall under the purview of "bundled libraries" ? https://fedoraprojec

Re: guayadeque package review and bundled libraries

Martin Gansser píše v So 15. 09. 2012 v 20:00 +0200: > I am working on a package preview for guayadeque > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853553#c9 > > Brandon told me that i have to alk the devel list regarding 'bundled > libraries' > It se

Re: guayadeque package review and bundled libraries

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 08:00:55PM +0200, Martin Gansser wrote: > I am working on a package preview for guayadeque > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853553#c9 > > Brandon told me that i have to alk the devel list regarding 'bundled > libraries' &g

Re: guayadeque package review and bundled libraries

On 09/15/2012 08:00 PM, Martin Gansser wrote: I am working on a package preview for guayadeque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853553#c9 Brandon told me that i have to alk the devel list regarding 'bundled libraries' It seems that the guayadeque sources contains so

guayadeque package review and bundled libraries

I am working on a package preview for guayadeque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853553#c9 Brandon told me that i have to alk the devel list regarding 'bundled libraries' It seems that the guayadeque sources contains some bundled libraries, wxsqlite and wxcurl (wxMD5?). ha

Re: Remove bundled libraries from a Qt package TexStudio

Awesome, works great! Thanks a lot! johannes On 07/28/2011 05:36 PM, 80 wrote: > Hi, > > i cooked few patches for you: > * remove hunspell ==> basically, you just need to remove all > references to the bundled hunspell in texstudio.pro and use system > headers instead of bundled ones. > * force

Re: Remove bundled libraries from a Qt package TexStudio

Hi, i cooked few patches for you: * remove hunspell ==> basically, you just need to remove all references to the bundled hunspell in texstudio.pro and use system headers instead of bundled ones. * force the use of xdg-open for viewers, this patch should be upstreamed or at least, fix function x11d

Remove bundled libraries from a Qt package TexStudio

Hello, I have some problems removing bundled libraries from a package of mine. I recently filed a Review Request due to a name change of the package and during that process the bundled libs were found. [1] Namely the package contains: - hunspell - qtsingleapplication - qcodeedit (although I