Thanks Adam for your answer.
Horace
发件人: Adam Jackson
发送时间: 2022年1月26日 5:01
收件人: Lan Horace
抄送: xorg@lists.x.org
主题: Re: license of Xorg dummy driver
The answer to this is probably the same as the answer for any other
xorg code you encounter without an
The answer to this is probably the same as the answer for any other
xorg code you encounter without an explicit license. I answered this
before in some detail for the I2C code in the server:
https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/2019-March/059652.html
The dummy driver has a similar history, we
@Adam
Do you have any comment for the license of dummy driver? Thanks a lot
Horace
发件人: xorg 代表 Lan Horace
发送时间: 2022年1月19日 14:56
收件人: xorg@lists.x.org
主题: license of Xorg dummy driver
Hi
I have a question about the license of Xorg dummy driver. The code is
Hi
I have a question about the license of Xorg dummy driver. The code is at
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-dummy
This repo is set as no license. According to
http://choosealicense.com/licenses/no-license/
I can't use or modify it. But my understanding is all Xorg li
Lars-Dominik Braun, le dim. 14 juin 2020 09:11:05 +0200, a ecrit:
> Xorg’s dummy driver lacks a clear open source license statement[1]. Its
> COPYING file simply states “Copyright 2002, SuSE Linux AG”, indicating
> it is non-free software. Is that correct? I see Debian is distributing
>
Hi,
Xorg’s dummy driver lacks a clear open source license statement[1]. Its
COPYING file simply states “Copyright 2002, SuSE Linux AG”, indicating
it is non-free software. Is that correct? I see Debian is distributing
the driver under the terms of the X11 license[2], so is Gentoo Linux[3
On Sun, 2019-10-27 at 09:37 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> We should probably delete lnx_kbd.c, both to give license clarity and to stop
> people from thinking it's a useful driver to have on Linux systems any more.
>
> If you're building the X server for a Linux b
On Sun, October 27, 2019 9:37 am, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> Why do you care about the server license if you're writing an application
> (i.e. a client)?
Not the OP, but I will tell you why it is important. GPL, as you know, is
put in place to protect the opensource aspect of the code,
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
GPL does not require clients to follow the licensing conditions of
servers they connect to.
In regard to this point, I will just point out that I advocate the use of
GPL as a form of protection, and the input drivers should fall into that
category.
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
You explained the GPL, which I well understand, but not why someone
working on client software cares about the license of something on
the server side. GPL does not require clients to follow the licensing
conditions of servers they connect to.
Why
On 10/27/19 10:07 AM, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Sun, October 27, 2019 9:37 am, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Why do you care about the server license if you're writing an application
(i.e. a client)?
Not the OP, but I will tell you why it is important.
You explained the GPL, which I well under
[I've cc'ed the xorg mailing list, where this is a much more on-topic question
than the freedesktop general mailing list.]
On 10/27/19 6:12 AM, 布施 博明 wrote:
Hello
I am developing X application now
I have one question about xorg-xf86-input-keyboard license
Why do you care about
On Thu, 2019-03-07 at 16:38 +, Pinegar, Kent T wrote:
> All,
>
> There are two files in the xserver source code called xf86i2c.h and
> xf86i2c.c. They contain copyrights by Itai Nahshon and Michael
> Schimek; however, the top-level Xserve license on github does not
>
All,
There are two files in the xserver source code called xf86i2c.h and xf86i2c.c.
They contain copyrights by Itai Nahshon and Michael Schimek; however, the
top-level Xserve license on github does not mention these two developers. Does
anyone know what license would cover these files.
Kent
On Wed, 2019-03-06 at 04:20 +0100, Samy Mahmoudi wrote:
> In an effort to set proper licensing information within the FreeBSD
> port system, I am wondering if someone knows xmore well enough to
> properly replace the stub file COPYING with a proper COPYING file.
>
> • Hand-written files mostly con
In an effort to set proper licensing information within the FreeBSD port
system, I am wondering if someone knows xmore well enough to properly
replace the stub file COPYING with a proper COPYING file.
• Hand-written files mostly contain headers with variants of X11/MIT.
• Files generated by autoto
;xf86i3c.h" a part of X11 software?
What is the license for this file? X11 software is released under MIT Style
License, is it the license for us to use this file? Can we have permission to
use this file?
Thank you very much for your prompt reply to my questions above.
B
You may look at Fedora packages, xorg font licenses were audited there a few
years ago. Thus fonts that Fedora chose to keep because their licensing was
compatible with Fedora goals should be tagged with the correct license nowadays
And Tom Callaway may still have legal data on the fonts that
> I am trying to determine the license for font-bh-lucidatypewriter-dpi75,
> which appears to be under the Bigelow & Holmes copyright. Any information
> would be appreciated.
I do not really know, but as nobody else replies, let me at least provide
three pointers:
The freedeskt
I am trying to determine the license for font-bh-lucidatypewriter-dpi75, which
appears to be under the Bigelow & Holmes copyright. Any information would be
appreciated.
___
xorg@lists.x.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop
20 matches
Mail list logo
