[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 01/01: gnu: Add perl-inline-c.
From: |
Ricardo Wurmus |
Subject: |
Re: 01/01: gnu: Add perl-inline-c. |
Date: |
Tue, 03 Apr 2018 23:20:06 +0200 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.0; emacs 25.3.1 |
Nils Gillmann <address@hidden> writes:
> Roel Janssen transcribed 509 bytes:
>>
>> Roel Janssen <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>> > Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:
>> >
>> >> Hi Roel,
>> >>
>> >> address@hidden (Roel Janssen) skribis:
>> >>
>> >>> + (license (package-license perl))))
>> >>
>> >> Could you use (license perl-license) instead? It doesn’t make any
>> >> difference in this case but it’s generally “safer” (see (guix
>> >> licenses)).
>
> Can you tell me why it is safer to say perl-license instead of
> package-license perl?
Following Ludo’s reference to “(guix licenses)” we can see this comment:
;; The license of Perl, GPLv1+ or Artistic (we ignore the latter here).
;; We define this alias to avoid circular dependencies introduced by the use
;; of the '(package-license perl)' idiom.
--
Ricardo
GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net