https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1335988
--- Comment #10 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #8)
> # LGPLv3+: src/Fl_GDI_Printer.cxx, src/Flv_List.cc,
src/Flv_Table.cc
> # BSD: src/tinymt32*
> License: GPLv3+ and LGPLv3+ and BSD
Are files under BSD and LGPLv3+ and GPLv3+ combined into a single compiled
binary? Then the license is just GPLv3+. The "License" tag is about the
binary rpm, not the sources.
# LGPLv3+: src/Fl_GDI_Printer.cxx, src/Flv_List.cc, src/Flv_Table.cc
# BSD: src/tinymt32*
are involved during build. Is it not a Mixed Source Licensing Scenario ?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Mixed_Source_...
s/french/French/
I'm afraid you'll have to repack the tarball to remove the non-free doc
part, because the SRPM must be distributable. Removing it during package
build is too late.
We need to contact upstream. I'm waiting for confirmation of XCAS's forum
registration.
(In reply to Han Frederic from comment #9)
Up to now I was not able to reproduce Jerry's crash. Is it easy
for you to
reproduce it?
if it is related to pari_init_opts the only thing I see is that giac try to
guess if another library (ex sage) has already done a pari_init with the:
if(!avma) test. But many libs (ex eclib) does the same because it is a
problem for sage to remove it.
This failed test comes out if I try to compile giac
http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/debian/dists/stable/main/sour...
always on Fedora > 22.
Do you know why the packages from
http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/debian/dists/stable/main/source are
biggest than those from
http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/giac/ ?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component