LPPL10 license consequences intended? (arabic/arabtex)

CyberLeo Kitsana cyberleo at cyberleo.net
Sun Mar 23 00:09:50 UTC 2014

On 03/22/2014 06:05 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:16 PM, CyberLeo Kitsana <cyberleo at cyberleo.net>wrote:
>> On 03/22/2014 02:27 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 10:29 AM, John Marino <freebsd.contact at marino.st
>>> wrote:
>>>> Is it correct that LPPL10 can't be built in a batch?
>> No. You must accept the license before you can build the port, and you
>> cannot interactively accept a license in non-interactive batch mode.
> I have again looked over the LPPL and there is no language requiring
> explicit acceptance of the license that I can find. I see nothing about
> this more restrictive than LGPL or other standard licenses.
> Am I missing it?

I was elucidating from the point of view of the ports license
infrastructure, not the point of view of a lawyer.

The code expects you to accept the license, and will not proceed until
you do. It's not my call whether or not it is legal for FreeBSD to
accept this license on behalf of the user.

Fuzzy love,
Technical Administrator
CyberLeo.Net Webhosting
<CyberLeo at CyberLeo.Net>

Furry Peace! - http://www.fur.com/peace/

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list