Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Masked by: * license(s) [SOLVED]
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ISHAIM
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 143
Location: Chicago, IL

PostPosted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 8:58 pm    Post subject: Masked by: * license(s) [SOLVED] Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
Shining Arcanine
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 1110

PostPosted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 31892
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
ISHAIM
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 143
Location: Chicago, IL

PostPosted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Solved. Thank you very much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gentree
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5227
Location: France, Old Europe

PostPosted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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="*" :x
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.

AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dambacher
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 11 Feb 2003
Posts: 276
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
dambacher
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 11 Feb 2003
Posts: 276
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
jcc3
n00b
n00b


Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 17

PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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="*" :x


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
View user's profile Send private message
AllenJB
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 02 Sep 2005
Posts: 1283
Location: Ashford, Kent

PostPosted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

See also http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Licenses
_________________
http://gentoo-wiki.com :: http://lug.org.uk :: http://www.linux.org/groups/ :: User Blogs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sadako
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 3753
Location: sleeping in the bathtub

PostPosted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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="*" :x
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
View user's profile Send private message
pandora
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 25 Sep 2002
Posts: 93
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 31892
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
ShadowCat8
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 07 Oct 2008
Posts: 136
Location: Arcadia, CA, USA

PostPosted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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

_________________
------
"There is no value to explaining sanity to an insane person, just as there is no value of explaining rabies to a rabid dog... They will both bite you for your effort."
-- oldbitman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
honeymak
Guru
Guru


Joined: 30 Dec 2002
Posts: 456

PostPosted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

portage/package.license is NOT working after update portage

8O
_________________
hackers - make sth real
academics - read sth said to be real
http://facebook.com/honey.mak
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wlchase
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 04 Jul 2003
Posts: 81
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
dirkfanick
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 12 Jan 2011
Posts: 201
Location: germany - hamburg

PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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. :D
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
F1r31c3r
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 31 Aug 2007
Posts: 80
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 4:36 pm    Post subject: Say what? Reply with quote

Come on people, we are all hackers, if you are using Gentoo then you are a Hacker like it or not.

You had to mildly hack the OS to get it installed or at least some part of it. Accept license wow "*" YES you clearly have not read it so is it really legaly binding lol.

Who gives a crap frankly, i mean what could possible terms and conditions do to affect your everyday life? What kind of spying could they possibly do that is made legal by terms and conditions, License or any other part of it for that matter.

If you spot an offending code then remove it, then crack the source of that code, release the truth and destroy the person who made it. Sounds like fun to me, No stupid terms and condition, license agreement will make any difference to all this for the end user.

Its all used in a big corporate company playing field and has nothing to do with ordinary people. Most accept the terms of Apple and M$ now that is seriously messed up. Still dont stop you hacking the crap out of this binary software junk. iTunes deserves to be hacked the crap out of it. What do they expect, restrict the user and the user will break out, JailBreaker baby, lets get it on.

So just run riot, who cares, not me. Mr Law firm cares but not the people so .!.. to them and lets enjoy hacking more software.

We need a feature to search and find binary blobs in code simply, that is a good idea. What use is a program if we dont use it lol. That said we can easy hack it and build an alternative simple enough, ish'ish :p If you are going to tell me that all this is illegal well, what planet you on. Legislation saves lives, Law is just something that has always existed, created by mother nature so to tell me that i can not use my computer as i wish due to some license is stupid to say the least.

Who is pissed yet with my "Does this face :D look bothered" :P

When these companies start fully respecting people and their freedom then i will see the need to respect there's, until then they can kiss my tee-hiny. accepting a license means nothing. The built in DRM on my ISP's router using GNU code is stopping me from flashing in my own firmware and i am supposed to take their terms conditions, license seriously. Hell no, hack away people, enjoy.
_________________
When i look In-between white and black i see a rainbow of colours
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mv
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 4078

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 4:59 pm    Post subject: Re: Say what? Reply with quote

F1r31c3r wrote:
When these companies start fully respecting people and their freedom

It is your choice if you decide to use software which is not under a free license. However, wouldn't it be better to not use that software and use a free alternative instead if it exists?
This is exactly what you achieve by not using ACCEPT_LICENSE="*": For libraries e.g. which have alternative free implementations, portage will install those instead.
For those for which portage did not find a free alternative, you can still accept the license per package - even if you do not want to read it.
Of course, as long as you only install such a thing on your own machine it probably plays no role. However, it plays e.g. a role if you write software which uses a library: In this case you would probably like to use the free library instead of the unfree one. Which is hard to do if you do not know which is which...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
F1r31c3r
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 31 Aug 2007
Posts: 80
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Say what? Reply with quote

mv wrote:

It is your choice if you decide to use software which is not under a free license.


I would like the above statement to be 100% viable, Adobe-Flash need i say more. I like. watching youtube videos and for some reason no matter what i do i can not get GNUflash stuff to work properly. its like every video runs differently.

mv wrote:
However, it plays e.g. a role if you write software which uses a library: In this case you would probably like to use the free library instead of the unfree one. Which is hard to do if you do not know which is which...


That is so very true. if our normal brains that have been subject to loud music, alcohol, polution and toxins of all kinds could actually keep a track of 60000+ packages, libraries and more then i guess this would not be a problem. Dam what a mess.
_________________
When i look In-between white and black i see a rainbow of colours
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum