Pretty free actually

Posted Jan 22, 2014 19:18 UTC (Wed) by coriordan (guest, #7544)
In reply to: I assume they're non-free by juliank
Parent article: POSIX.1-2013 man pages for Linux

> WTF are you talking about?

The link in the story: http://www.unix.org/online.html

I click it and see: "Register to read or download the specification".

That last paragraph you quoted looks like a licence notice alright:

> Redistribution of this material is permitted so long as this notice and
> the corresponding notices within each POSIX manual page are retained on
> any distribution, and the nroff source is included. Modifications to
> the text are permitted so long as any conflicts with the standard
> are clearly marked as such in the text.

Is that the entire licence? Not just a summary?

If so, it's pretty free alright. Better than I was expecting after I saw the website. Not sure if Debian would accept it.

Pretty free actually

Posted Jan 22, 2014 20:10 UTC (Wed) by andresfreund (subscriber, #69562) [Link]

Debian has non-free, in which it already has manpages-posix{,-dev}.

Pretty free actually

Posted Jan 22, 2014 20:12 UTC (Wed) by juliank (guest, #45896) [Link]

Well, if you click on the online version, then yes, you must register.

But the email clearly states

"
Tarballs containing the pages can be found at
https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/man-pages/man-pages...
and
https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/man-pages/man-pages...
"

The other stuff is just the original HTML version.

Pretty free actually

Posted Jan 22, 2014 20:27 UTC (Wed) by pbonzini (subscriber, #60935) [Link] (2 responses)

It's probably not Debian-free just like the GFDL's invariant sections aren't, but it's pretty good.

Pretty free actually

Posted Jan 22, 2014 20:35 UTC (Wed) by juliank (guest, #45896) [Link] (1 responses)

Yes. It's really the same license as the old version included in man-pages <= 2.80, AFAICT. And those are included as manpages-posix in Debian non-free.

Pretty free actually

Posted Jan 23, 2014 2:44 UTC (Thu) by mkerrisk (subscriber, #1978) [Link]

> Yes. It's really the same license as the old version
> included in man-pages <= 2.80, AFAICT.

Yes, that's correct.