| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ISHAIM
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 143
Location: Chicago, IL
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 8:58 pm Post subject: Masked by: * license(s) [SOLVED] |
 |
|
Hello,
During the end of any successful portage operation, I get the following messages about licenses:
| Code: | !!! The following installed packages are masked:
- dev-java/sun-jdk-1.6.0.15 (masked by: dlj-1.1 license(s))
A copy of the 'dlj-1.1' license is located at '/usr/portage/licenses/dlj-1.1'.
- dev-java/blackdown-jdk-1.4.2.03-r15 (masked by: sun-bcla-java-vm license(s))
A copy of the 'sun-bcla-java-vm' license is located at '/usr/portage/licenses/sun-bcla-java-vm'.
- app-emulation/virtualbox-ose-additions-3.0.6 (masked by: PUEL license(s))
A copy of the 'PUEL' license is located at '/usr/portage/licenses/PUEL'.
For more information, see the MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge
man page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook. |
I'm unsure what to do as I'd like to get rid of the error message.
Thanks.
Last edited by ISHAIM on Sat Jan 30, 2010 9:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Shining Arcanine
Veteran
Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 1110
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You can fix that by adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" or ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" if you do not want to automatically accept all licenses to your make.conf file. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 29965
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ISHAIM,
Gentoo now allows you to manage your system using software licences.
Your dev-java/sun-jdk-1.6.0.15 was installed before this feature was in portage.
make.conf has a new variable ACCEPT_LICENSE which allows you to control which licences you will accept globally.
There is also a /etc/portage/package.license file which gives you per package control.
See man make.conf and man portage.
What you need to do depends on how you want to manage licences.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ISHAIM
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 143
Location: Chicago, IL
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Solved. Thank you very much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shining Arcanine wrote: | | You can fix that by adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" or ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" if you do not want to automatically accept all licenses to your make.conf file. |
Since this has now gone sticky I think the following should be pointed out.
Clearly ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" is a pretty dumb thing to do since it means not only have you no intention of reading any license that you are legally agreeing to by installing the software, but you will not even be aware which packages have restrictive licenses.
Licenses are not always as banal as you may imagine. I've yet to find anyone that is aware that they gave google permission to store and analyse the entire contents of all their emails when they signed up for Gmail. Though they usually seem rather shocked when I tell them.
Google knows all your personal social network and what interests you have in common. Cool. ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" 
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dambacher
Apprentice
Joined: 11 Feb 2003
Posts: 234
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And where can I see wich licenses are accepted by default?
Maybe it would be handier if someone creates an eselect plugin for this?
Something like
| Code: |
eselect license list
eselect license accept dlj
eselect license ask dlj
|
the latter one shows the given license with less or something and then asks "Do you accept (Yes/No)"
/dambacher |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dambacher
Apprentice
Joined: 11 Feb 2003
Posts: 234
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dambacher wrote: | And where can I see wich licenses are accepted by default?
|
/etc/make.globals sais
| Code: | | ACCEPT_LICENSE="* -@EULA" |
What this means, you can fiund it in /usr/portage/profiles/license_groups wich is a rather long list.
/dambacher |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jcc3
n00b
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 16
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: | | Shining Arcanine wrote: | | You can fix that by adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" or ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" if you do not want to automatically accept all licenses to your make.conf file. |
Since this has now gone sticky I think the following should be pointed out.
Clearly ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" is a pretty dumb thing to do since it means not only have you no intention of reading any license that you are legally agreeing to by installing the software, but you will not even be aware which packages have restrictive licenses.
Licenses are not always as banal as you may imagine. I've yet to find anyone that is aware that they gave google permission to store and analyse the entire contents of all their emails when they signed up for Gmail. Though they usually seem rather shocked when I tell them.
Google knows all your personal social network and what interests you have in common. Cool. ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" |
What was the status quo? No explicit check. In your view, does this make anyone who emerged anything in the past, without proactively researching each individual port, "clearly pretty dumb"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AllenJB
Veteran
Joined: 02 Sep 2005
Posts: 1283
Location: Ashford, Kent
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sadako
Advocate
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 3753
Location: sleeping in the bathtub
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: | | Shining Arcanine wrote: | | You can fix that by adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" or ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" if you do not want to automatically accept all licenses to your make.conf file. |
Since this has now gone sticky I think the following should be pointed out.
Clearly ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" is a pretty dumb thing to do since it means not only have you no intention of reading any license that you are legally agreeing to by installing the software, but you will not even be aware which packages have restrictive licenses.
Licenses are not always as banal as you may imagine. I've yet to find anyone that is aware that they gave google permission to store and analyse the entire contents of all their emails when they signed up for Gmail. Though they usually seem rather shocked when I tell them.
Google knows all your personal social network and what interests you have in common. Cool. ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" |
While I agree with you on the google thing (and refuse to use gmail, or anything ther than their search engine because of this kind of crap), this only accepting completely free licenses by default is a pain in the ass.
It's fantastic that you can select which licenses to accept now, but I think it should have remained optional with the default to accept all, what we have now is all "non-free" packages essentially being masked.
While it's extemely simple to unmask them, at least for anyone with some experience with gentoo, it's going to be a bit of a pain for newcomers, who IMO are much more likely to try to install "non-free" licensed software in the first place...
_________________
"You have to invite me in" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pandora
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 25 Sep 2002
Posts: 93
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: | | Shining Arcanine wrote: | | You can fix that by adding ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" or ACCEPT_LICENSE="dlj-1.1" if you do not want to automatically accept all licenses to your make.conf file. |
Since this has now gone sticky I think the following should be pointed out.
Clearly ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" is a pretty dumb thing to do since it means not only have you no intention of reading any license that you are legally agreeing to by installing the software |
Licenses of this sort are not legally binding, although naturally copyright continues to apply. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 29965
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pandora,
Whats legally binding varies from jursidiction to jursidiction.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ShadowCat8
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 07 Oct 2008
Posts: 118
Location: Arcadia, CA, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, remember what one of the Open-Source Movement's founding fathers had once said:
| Quote: | "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."
-- Richard Stallman, Founder of the GNU Project and the FSF |
_________________
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done"
-- Linus Torvalds |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
honeymak
Guru
Joined: 30 Dec 2002
Posts: 456
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
portage/package.license is NOT working after update portage
_________________
hackers - make sth real
academics - read sth said to be real
http://facebook.com/honey.mak |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wlchase
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 04 Jul 2003
Posts: 81
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I concur, if it matters.
Bill
EDIT: And now, 2.6.31-r10 sources & portage 2.1.7.17, it works again!
B |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dirkfanick
Apprentice
Joined: 12 Jan 2011
Posts: 201
Location: germany - hamburg
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For "fun":
| Quote: | | Google knows all your personal social network and what interests you have in common. Cool. ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" |
And google also knows anyone who denies this.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Portage & Programming
