From: Sam G. <sa...@el...> - 2009-12-27 22:19:33
|
Hi, I contribute to gNewSense, which aims to be a fully Free distro. We have this bug report [1] about the file glut.h in Mesa. The issue is that Mark J. Kilgard did not give permission to modify the file in his original license notice. This was reported and solved for the GLUT package in Debian [2]. So now we're wondering how this applies to Mesa. I've contacted FSF Licensing Lab about it and they said: "Please be careful not to read the notice any further than it goes. In particular: it only applies to what Mark wrote, and it only applies to whatever code of his existed in libglut when he sent his reply to Debian. Nothing anybody else wrote, and nothing that wasn't in libglut at the time." So if we can show that your glut.h was initially based on that of the GLUT package then we'd be a big step closer to a solution. I've compared the GLUT 3.7 tarball [3] to your initial commit [4], but there are some differences. Could you help the gNewSense project (and other free distros) with this? Thanks. [1] http://bugs.gnewsense.org/Bugs/00365 [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=131997 [3] ftp://ftp.sgi.com/sgi/opengl/glut/ [4] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/plain/include/GL/glut.h?id=afb833d4e89c312460a4ab9ed6a7a8ca4ebbfe1c |
From: tom f. <tf...@al...> - 2009-12-28 04:49:31
|
Sam Geeraerts <sa...@el...> writes: > "Please be careful not to read the notice any further than it goes. > In particular: it only applies to what Mark wrote, and it only > applies to whatever code of his existed in libglut when he sent his > reply to Debian. Nothing anybody else wrote, and nothing that wasn't > in libglut at the time." > > So if we can show that your glut.h was initially based on that of > the GLUT package then we'd be a big step closer to a solution. I've > compared the GLUT 3.7 tarball [3] to your initial commit [4], but > there are some differences. I suspect you'll need Brian to weigh in on the history, but as I recall there was a TODO about changing the glut included in Mesa to freeglut, which I imagine has a much more amenable license for your project. I can't seem to find it now, though... Anyway, you might consider subscribing to the -dev list and submitting a patch to that effect. -tom |
From: Brian P. <br...@vm...> - 2009-12-29 16:18:31
|
tom fogal wrote: > Sam Geeraerts <sa...@el...> writes: >> "Please be careful not to read the notice any further than it goes. >> In particular: it only applies to what Mark wrote, and it only >> applies to whatever code of his existed in libglut when he sent his >> reply to Debian. Nothing anybody else wrote, and nothing that wasn't >> in libglut at the time." >> >> So if we can show that your glut.h was initially based on that of >> the GLUT package then we'd be a big step closer to a solution. I've >> compared the GLUT 3.7 tarball [3] to your initial commit [4], but >> there are some differences. > > I suspect you'll need Brian to weigh in on the history, but as I recall > there was a TODO about changing the glut included in Mesa to freeglut, > which I imagine has a much more amenable license for your project. I > can't seem to find it now, though... I don't plan on switching to freeglut in the Mesa tree. There are (were?) a few implementation differences between the two libraries that caused some grief (pop-up menus were one). -Brian |
From: Brian P. <br...@vm...> - 2009-12-29 16:21:05
|
Sam Geeraerts wrote: > Hi, > > I contribute to gNewSense, which aims to be a fully Free distro. We have > this bug report [1] about the file glut.h in Mesa. The issue is that > Mark J. Kilgard did not give permission to modify the file in his > original license notice. This was reported and solved for the GLUT > package in Debian [2]. So now we're wondering how this applies to Mesa. > > I've contacted FSF Licensing Lab about it and they said: > > "Please be careful not to read the notice any further than it goes. In > particular: it only applies to what Mark wrote, and it only applies to > whatever code of his existed in libglut when he sent his reply to > Debian. Nothing anybody else wrote, and nothing that wasn't in libglut > at the time." > > So if we can show that your glut.h was initially based on that of the > GLUT package then we'd be a big step closer to a solution. I've compared > the GLUT 3.7 tarball [3] to your initial commit [4], but there are some > differences. > > Could you help the gNewSense project (and other free distros) with this? > Thanks. > > [1] http://bugs.gnewsense.org/Bugs/00365 > [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=131997 > [3] ftp://ftp.sgi.com/sgi/opengl/glut/ > [4] > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/plain/include/GL/glut.h?id=afb833d4e89c312460a4ab9ed6a7a8ca4ebbfe1c I think the simple answer for you here is to simply use freeglut instead of the Kilgard glut in Mesa. The Mesa releases ares split up so that Mesa, glut and the demos are separate: MesaLib-7.7.tar.gz MesaGLUT-7.7.tar.gz MesaDemos-7.7.tar.gz Just don't use MesaGLUT-7.7.tar.gz -Brian |