exo license

[Moritz Heiber]

Pavel,

just to make sure .. you're aware of the fact that almost all of the
files you mentioned below are installed and/or used by automake and
autoconf, right?

Regards,

Moritz

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 14:43:03 +0100
Pavel Nemec <pnemec at suse.cz> wrote:

> Hi, 
> it is possible to lower nubmer of licenses in exo packages to some reasonable 
> amount (preferable 1).
> 
> Our license digger discover this:
> score name                    id r files                       sample file
> .....+......................+...+.+....+..................................
>  1784 LGPL 2.0                 1 1   35 ...0.3.2.tar.bz2/exo-0.3.2/COPYING
>  1757 LGPL 2.1                 6 1  103 ...bz2/exo-0.3.2/exo/exo-binding.c
>   372 GPL 2.0 or later         7 2   27 ...z2/exo-0.3.2/po-doc/Makefile.am
>   357 (GPL 2.0 or later)      (7)1    2 ....2.tar.bz2/exo-0.3.2/aclocal.m4
>   314 FSF unlimited            9 1   31 ...3.2.tar.bz2/exo-0.3.2/configure
>   184 GPL 2.0 or ANY          10 1    5 ....2.tar.bz2/exo-0.3.2/py-compile
>   146 (GPL 2.0 with linking)(122)1    3 ....2.tar.bz2/exo-0.3.2/config.sub
>   124 (GPL 2.0 or ANY)       (10)1    3 ...0.3.2.tar.bz2/exo-0.3.2/missing
>    76 X11 License             11 2    1 ....2.tar.bz2/exo-0.3.2/install-sh
>    28 FDL 1.1                 16 1    7 .../exo-preferred-applications.xml
>    17 Any public domain       20 1    2 ...tar.bz2/exo-0.3.2/mkinstalldirs
>    12 Any permissive          17 1    1 ...bz2/exo-0.3.2/po/Makefile.in.in
>    10 (FSF unlimited)         (9)1    1 ....2.tar.bz2/exo-0.3.2/aclocal.m4
>     3 any reference local    246      1                           exo.spec
> ---------------------------