[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14529] Submission of Real Time Applica

From: Marco Morandini
Subject: [Savannah-register-public] [task #14529] Submission of Real Time Application Interface (for Linux)
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2017 05:19:16 -0400 (EDT)
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0

Follow-up Comment #36, task #14529 (project administration):

New version:

> base/include/.rtai_shm.h.swp is still in the tarball. 


> Is doc/doxygen/ generated? It says Xapian
> is an "point.html open source" library; Savannah uses free 
> software, not open source. 

It works (and went) like this: a skeleton of the the configuration file is first auto-generated by Doxygen.
Then, is customized by hand. When a new Doxygen introduces new
options, or deprecates old options, it gives to the user thee option to update
the configuration file with sane default, without modifying, if possible, the
user choices.
I made the error to follow Doxygen's suggestion, and updated the configuration
file. Doxygen added the comment descibing Xapian as "open source", even if
Xapian is GPL. I've changed that comment now. However, this is fragile, and
I'm not completely comfortable with the change because Xapian, in his own home
page, describes itself (wrongly, but this is not the point) as open source. 
Anyway: fixed.

> rtai-lab/scilab5/RTAI/license.txt says:
> Copyright (C) 2009 Roberto Bucher
> 2010-2011 Holger Nahrstaedt 


> rtai-lab/scilab5/libs/scicoslibs.tgz lacks copyright and licensing notices.

This is more tricky, and I need your help in deciding what to do.
The tarball contained some precompiled libraries, with sources taken from
scilab, version 5.
Now: if one gets a pre-built scilab, or builds it from scratch, he does not
get those libraries build as we need them. 
Thus, the initial choice to distribute the pre-built libraries.
However, I don't think distributing binaries is right.
Thus, we got rid of the pre-built libraries (the -tgz is gone), and are
instead including the sources, taken from scilab 5, together with the Makefile
required to build them. I went through the added files, and fixed the
copyright notices (mostly removing the FSF address and adding the link to the
GPL, but also adding the text of the licenses).
However, we have a problem: many files (mostly those in
rtai-lab/scilab5/scicos_src) do have a copyright notice, but without year.
And, as these are not our files, but we have simply copied them, I really
don't know what year I could put there. 
So the question: is this ok? If it's not ok (I know it is not a "valid
copyright notice" as descibed in ) then please don't waste
your time on the tarball. And, if this is not ok, what would be better to do?

1) get rid of those sources, host somewhere a tarball with the sources,
packaged as we need them, and modify the Makefile in suche a way that the
tarball is automatically downloaded
2) do the same of 1), but with the pre-built libraries
3) give up out hope and go somewhere else (really hope this is not the case)
4) other ?

What do you suggest?

Thank you in advance,



Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]