iscan license question
Kevin Kofler
kevin.kofler at chello.at
Thu Jan 26 22:45:29 UTC 2006
> > > > Don't include any binary only bits, and we dodge the iffy RE clause.
> > > Which is what I'll do and make a similar package for livna, including
only
> > > the binary parts.
> >
> > That seems like the best plan of action.
>
> Would be, if iscan could be packaged that way. Unfortunately, it still
requires
> a non-free, binary-only library libesmod.so.1. So, is it OK to package that
> library even if we don't have its source?
IMHO, this would blatantly violate Fedora Extras guidelines. Why don't you just
package the whole thing for Livna or somewhere else? I doubt it would be usable
without the binary stuff anyway, so what's the point of putting unusable libs
into Extras?
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list