ction of the module license and the requested license of the
>> gnulib-tool invocation; and modules/snippet/c++defs says that it is
>> indeed under the LGPLv2+ license.
> I think that the attached patch correctly fixes the issue. It
> separates build-aux/ files from build-aux/sni
ten to match the
> intersection of the module license and the requested license of the
> gnulib-tool invocation; and modules/snippet/c++defs says that it is
> indeed under the LGPLv2+ license.
I think that the attached patch correctly fixes the issue. It
separates build-aux/ files from
On Mon, 2013-11-11 at 13:51 -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 11/11/2013 01:34 PM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> > Hello,
> > It seems that gnulib-tool installs files in build-aux like
> > "snippet/c++defs.h" that are under GPLv3+, even if the --lgpg=2 flag
>
> I assume you mean --lgpl=2
>
> > is
On 11/11/2013 01:34 PM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> Hello,
> It seems that gnulib-tool installs files in build-aux like
> "snippet/c++defs.h" that are under GPLv3+, even if the --lgpg=2 flag
I assume you mean --lgpl=2
> is specified. If these headers are GPLv3+ shouldn't they be skipped in
Hello,
It seems that gnulib-tool installs files in build-aux like
"snippet/c++defs.h" that are under GPLv3+, even if the --lgpg=2 flag
is specified. If these headers are GPLv3+ shouldn't they be skipped in
that case?
regards,
Nikos
