Re: Package Definition Place

[Ludovic Courtès]

Kete <address@hidden> skribis:

> On Saturday, January 04, 2014 12:47:06 PM Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> I’d recommend looking at how that tcsetpgrp check is implemented, to see
>> what makes it think it doesn’t work.  In particular what does
>> ‘config.log’ report about this test?
>
> I didn't find any mention.

Hmm, that’s surprising.  Normally config.log contains details about
failed configure tests.

>> The ‘license’ field should reflect the license of what gets installed.
>> So if build-time scripts are GPL, that doesn’t matter here.  But please
>> do skim over the license headers to make sure they’re all under that
>> X11-style license.
>
> Here is what I found with grep:
>       Completion/Unix/Command/_darcs is licensed under the GNU GPL. "zsh
>       will be linked against libgdbm.  This means the binary is covered by
>       the GNU General Public License.  This does not affect the source
>       code." config.guess and config.sub are also GPLed.

Does it comes with a copy of GDBM?  Or is it an optional dependency?
If the latter, then I guess you should add that dependency.

> The rest default to that X11-style license.

So you should keep that ‘x11-style’ license, with a comment above saying
that, since it’s linked against GDBM, it’s GPLv3+ in practice.

If it builds fine, feel free to post a patch as produced by ‘git
format-patch’ (please read “Submitting Patches” in ‘HACKING’.)

Thanks,
Ludo’.