[lsb-discuss] Minor queries on the LSB 4.0 SDK

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Tue Apr 28 10:17:32 PDT 2009


Dallman, John wrote:
> I'm trying this out and setting up infrastructure around it on SLES11
> on x64-64. A couple of details:
> 
> The README file for lsb-build-cc says:
> 
>> lsb-build-cc is Copyright 2007, Linux Foundation, and distributed
>> under the terms of the BSD Licence. See the Licence file for details.
> 
> The License file, of course, contains the Linux Foundation BSD-style
> license, but this doesn't actually mention BSD. This could be quite
> confusing for people new to free software licenses. Some rephrasing
> of the README along the lines of:
> 
> "lsb-build-cc is Copyright 2007, Linux Foundation, and distributed
> under the terms of the Linux Foundation Licence, which is very
> similar to the BSD License. See the Licence file for details."

A little bit of semantics there, I guess; from the OSI viewpoint
(opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php) the text of the BSD licence 
has replaceable fields, where you plug in who the licensor is.  
It's still the BSD license when you plug these values in.  Other 
schemes may differ, for example you use the GPL by putting a header 
in your file that refers to a license file (most people call that 
file COPYING), the license file itself is not modified at all as 
it's copyright FSF.  Ted... do you have any strong feelings that 
we should change anything here?

> Second, the lsbc++ and lsbcc compiler wrappers emit a warning every
> time they are run on SLES11:
> 
>     Warning: gcc version "4.3" may have problems for LSB builds
> 
> Is there actually a problem? 

Yes, there are some.  I don't know if they're being worked on.
It's possible that we ought to change the warning so it only
emits if using lsbc++, I'm not aware of specific problems when
using lsbcc.  Jeff - what do you think?


More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list