Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author

Re: Zsh bugfixes released by RedHat

Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Nov 6,  9:15pm, Axel Beckert wrote:
> }
> } > Technically they are supposed to offer the patch to us, although zsh's
> } > license is not as clingy that way as the GNU license for example.
> } 
> } JFTR: The GNU General Public License does not require that any
> } modification made to software under the GNU GPL is sent back to the
> } _author_ of the software.
> Right, I was being too non-specific when I used the word "us".  I meant
> they should offer the patch to anyone to whom they offer the binary.
> Since I'm getting the errata notice about the new binary, technically
> I should have access to the patch.  Which I do, it's just a PITA to
> download the entire .src.rpm and extract it.
> But they're also not required to make it *easy* to get the patch ...
> So thank you to the folks who did that for me, and hopefully RedHat
> will see the change I just pushed and pick that up instead.

Note that I took it from the CentOS repositories, because RedHat wont
distribute their patched zsh to me (neither in source nor binary form)!
(Yeah, I know, CentOS is a part of RedHat now.  Still.)

(I actually expected having to diff the source tree against a zsh
release, just like they used to with their Kernel tree.)

Christian Neukirchen  <chneukirchen@xxxxxxxxx>  http://chneukirchen.org

Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author