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=497622
--- Comment #6 from Tim Fenn <fenn(a)stanford.edu> 2009-05-05 00:08:46 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #4)
> > MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
> > - Stuff under contrib/ seems to be licensed under LGPLv2+, but nothing seems
to
> > be packaged from there.
> >
>
> the libraries that are built in contrib/ are lumped into libapbs.so* (along
> with some of the BSD licensed functions) - I've made note of the dual license,
> is it sufficient/OK to annotate the .so files as "BSD and LGPLv2+" in the
> %files section and add a PACKAGE-LICENSING file?
Damn. Then the current packaging is a no-go: you must strip apbs of the contrib
packages and package them separately.
At least maloc and pmg have upstreams here:
http://fetk.org/
Argh - OK, I'll talk with upstream, who I believe may be able to correct this.
Btw, you're maintaining PyMOL, right?
Yes.
Does it include an own copy of apbs?
No - thus the reason for this package. :(
--
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.