On 08/11 12:13, D. E. Evans wrote:
> What are the "free licenses" that the bsd.pkg.defaults.mk
> considers automatically acceptable?  BSD and GPL are listed, but
> obviously there are some others.  I would guess the X11 license
> is one.  Even those of us who do not have GNU style ranting running 
> in our blood would find this clarification important.  Otherwise,
> licenses are being agreed to without knowing what they are.

Anything not in pkgsrc/licenses/ is acceptable to pkgsrc.
 
> My original question was not directly answered, but it seems that
> the answer is that there is no way to reject licenses that are
> already accepted as "free licenses" by the pkg system.
> Personally, I would like to think that only the BSD license is
> acceptable, and that all other licenses should have an
> ACCEPTABLE_LICENSE entry in the .mk file.  Since the base system
> includes the GPL, and the X11 license (when installing XFree86),
> these licenses should be listed as acceptable by default, but
> still be required to have an ACCEPTABLE_LICENSE entry.

Correct, there is no way to reject any such "free licenses." This is
because, presently, pkgsrc only takes note of licenses thar are deemed
too restrictive. That is, the package maintainer must notice that the
software has a license that would obviously be considered inappropriate
in the eyes of some users, and then set the LICENSE variable
appropriately.

For users to be able to filter out GPL packages, for instance, would
require a copy of the GPL in pkgsrc/licenses/ (I think there should be a
copy regardless) and all GPLed software in pkgsrc to be marked as such
with the addition of "LICENSE=gpl" to their Makefiles.  This would be a
rather large effort, but one that would likely be appreciated by at
least a few people.