Hi all,
As I already thought only /usr/bin/lua uses readline, so I've patched
the package so that only /usr/bin/lua is linked to readline, leaving
/usr/lib[64]/liblua-5.1.so readline free and thus avoiding any potential
license troubles.
Regards,
Hans
Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 13:32 -0700, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
>> * Sat Oct 14 2006 Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx> 5.1.1-1
>> - New upstream release 5.1.1
>> - Fix detection of readline during compile (iow add readline support back)
> [...]
>> --- lua.spec 28 Aug 2006 04:24:13 -0000 1.18
>> +++ lua.spec 14 Oct 2006 20:32:35 -0000 1.19
>> @@ -1,16 +1,14 @@
>> Name: lua
>> -Version: 5.1
>> -Release: 7%{?dist}
>> +Version: 5.1.1
>> +Release: 1%{?dist}
>> Summary: Powerful light-weight programming language
>> -
>> Group: Development/Languages
>> License: MIT
> [...]
>> -BuildRequires: readline-devel, ncurses-devel
>> +BuildRequires: readline-devel ncurses-devel
>
> Doesn't linking lua with readline mean that the combined work now falls
> under the GPL, not MIT? If so, I think it would be good to change the
> License tag to reflect that. Or if possible, to split the parts that
> have been linked with readline into a separate GPL licensed subpackage,
> leaving everything else MIT.
>
> Actually maybe even better, look into linking with libedit instead?
> http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2006-02/msg00472.html
>
>
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
