Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461484 --- Comment #4 from manuel wolfshant <wolfy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-09-15 18:07:40 EDT --- There seem to be a couple of problems: - gpm-devel is needed as BR in order to get a functional mouse (at least on C5) - since you package twsetroot, I suggest including (in %doc) the README.twsetroot file and maybe setroot.sample too. In the /docs directory there are also some other files which seem to have interesting content (diagram.txt, FAQ). Do you have a special reason to not include them in the final rpm ? And now the real problems: - twmapscrn is built against the clients/mapscrn folder which seems to contain a private (old and slightly modified) copy of kbd (ftp://ftp.win.tue.nl/pub/linux-local/utils/kbd/kbd-1.06.tar.gz), which in turn is a system package. As usage of private copies of system libs is explicitly forbidden, I'd say we have an issue here - from the licensing point of view, we have a small mess a) lots of files have headers defining them as GPLv2+ (good) b) headers of some other files specifu Public Domain as license (good again) c) however there are several files ( for instance clients/threadtest.c and many files under /lib ) which have no license specified. What reason can we invoke in order to assume that they are like all the others, Public Domain or GPLv2+ ? In addition to that, the sourcefarge page of the project (http://sourceforge.net/projects/twin/) claims that the project is licensed as GPL and LGPL, but LGPL is only mentioned in the source through the presence of the standard LGPL license file; I have not been able to locate any other trace of it. Public Domain + GPLv2+ = no problem, but the presence of files with no specific license make me ask for help. Anyone more experienced in licensing willing to shed some light ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review