Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add mesa-demos.

[Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> address@hidden (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") skribis:
>
>> From 051341d49fae36579ce318ab0b9c245ed084cdae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: =?UTF-8?q?Taylan=20Ulrich=20Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kammer?=
>>  <address@hidden>
>> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:57:51 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH 2/3] gnu: msea: Propagate input libxshmfence.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa): Propagate input libxshmfence.
>
> [...]
>
>> +        ("libxshmfence" ,libxshmfence)
>
> Please add a margin comment explaining the reason.

It's in the "Requires.private" field of the gl.pc pkg-config file.  The
same seems to be the case for other packages in the propagated-inputs
list.  Should it be explained for all of them?..

>> From e1f288dee780b374fc2162eb39d96a50d64964c1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: =?UTF-8?q?Taylan=20Ulrich=20Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kammer?=
>>  <address@hidden>
>> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:58:25 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH 3/3] gnu: Add mesa-demos.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa-demos): New variable.
>
> [...]
>
>> +    ;; The package contains many source files without a license, some
>> +    ;; instances of the expat license, and some X11 style licenses by SGI, 
>> so
>> +    ;; we consider it to be collectively under the X11 license.
>
> Is there a top-level ‘LICENSE’ or ‘COPYING’ or ‘COPYRIGHT’ file?  If
> there is, then the intent is most likely that the files without a
> license headers are covered by whatever this top-level file says.
>
> If there is really no indication, that would make the software non-free.

Sadly, there is no such file.

Debian has it as a "source package", and has a Copyright file assembled
for it:

http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/m/mesa-demos/mesa-demos_8.0.1-2_copyright

It builds the mesa-utils and mesa-utils-extra packages from this source
package.  Do we have to do something similar?

Taylan