Licenses and Distribution (WAS Re: XFree-4.4.0)

Matthias Benkmann msbREMOVE-THIS at winterdrache.de
Sat Mar 6 14:18:49 PST 2004


On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 15:41:10 -0500 (EST) Bill's LFS Login
<lfsbill at nospam.dot> wrote:

> Finally, each user is responsible for conformance to licensing
> restrictions, not BLFS. If BLFS takes on the responsibility of trying to
> inform the user, there may be a possible liability if some legal action
> were ever undertaken.
> 
> Better to just tell the user to read the docs that come with each
> package.

This is not necessary. LFS is primarily targeted at users. All of the
packages in BLFS have in common (AFAIK) that they do not place
restrictions on the use of the software. Only when you want to do
something that is otherwise forbidden by copyright law (e.g. modify or
distribute) will you need to look at the license.
How many people here will modify and/or distribute any of the BLFS
packages?

This whole licensing issue should be ignored completely by (B)LFS.

MSB

-- 
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.




More information about the blfs-dev mailing list