On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 10:44:46AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 10:17:39AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 01:41:16PM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote: > > > > > Right now the amiga and mac m68k bootloaders don't exist in the debian > > > > > archive. This probably makes sense, because they aren't linux programs. > > > > > However, it makes locating them and making them available for cdroms and > > > > > such more trouble. > > > > > > > > > > The total size is about 2MB. > > > > > > > > > > What do ya'll think, should I put them in a package for convenience or > > > > > just leave them on a website? > > > > > > > > I would recomend uploading them to contrib. After all, if i remember > > > > well, both amiboot and apusboot are GPLed software, which just need a > > > > foreign toolchain to build. The same will go for miboot, once we have > > > > reimplemented the first boot stage of it. > > > > > > They should (are?) build with gcc, just not on the autobuilders. > > > > No, stuff built with non-free java have been in contrib previously, so i > > don't think that having a foreign OS builded stuff there should be a > > problem. I don't think they are autobuilt anyway. > > I ment the bootloaders, not the stuff in contrib. If its compiled with > gcc under AmigaOS that should be good enough for main.
Nope, main should be buildable with stuff from main. > > > Don't forget to include the needed libs + sources (ixemu.library for > > > amiboot, right?) linked in. > > > > Any idea what the licence for those are ? > > A few days back someone saied its GPL now. I had in mind that it was > Public Domain or free for non-commercial use years back, many years > back. Ok, i can investigate, i have good contact with at least a part of the remaining amiga folk. > > > > See the thread about boot loaders i started, and the legal problems that > > > > have to do with it. This means that debian-installer in main will not be > > > > able to build depend on them, which is a shame, but we may create a > > > > debian-installer-contrib or whatever, which will build the needed stuff > > > > for them, as joeyh suggested. > > > > > > > > I have no idea how this can be regrouped into debian-cd or whatever > > > > later on. > > > > > > > > Friendly, > > > > > > > > Sven Luther > > > > > > Is non-autobuildable a reason for contrib? As long as its a free > > > toolchain and Debian has the source ... > > > > As long as debian has the source, and that the source is free, then it > > is good for contrib, no matter how you build it. Look at the java > > situation for example. > > But why not main? Because main cannot build-depend on stuff out of main. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
