[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FSDG status of chromium
|
From: |
Marius Bakke |
|
Subject: |
Re: FSDG status of chromium |
|
Date: |
Tue, 25 Sep 2018 22:49:19 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Notmuch/0.27 (https://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/26.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) |
Andreas Enge <address@hidden> writes:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 09:08:42PM +0200, Marius Bakke wrote:
>> That leaves "first party" source files. Admittedly I haven't audited
>> all of those other than superficial grepping. Do you know whether parts
>> of Chromium are considered non-free? I noticed a number of files are
>> missing license information: in those cases I have assumed that the
>> top-level "LICENSE" file (BSD-3) applies.
>
> Debian has a package "chromium-browser" in the free section:
> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/chromium-browser
>
> So at least it is apparently possible to get a working binary with only
> free sources.
To clarify: the few files flagged by 'checklicenses.py' are as far as I
can tell all free software. The script just fails to classify them [4].
[4] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=28291
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature