* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-11-21 05:40]: > Well portage has that, but one doesn't need to add these 'free' licenses > to it. And the automatic addition of accepted licenses doesn't work > yet, but I think it's under way. This was developed, because some games > need eula's accepted when installed. So if one adds license to the > ACCEPT_LICENSES or something like that. Then these ebuild does not need > ones acceptance before installing.
I remember this being mentioned as in progress quite a while ago. I think it's a rather necessary part of a package management system, so I don't know why it's taking so long. You should be given the chance to `accept' the license before installing software. (Sure you can grep LICENSE foo.ebuild, but that's not the Gentoo way.) I know it's not a big deal most of the time, but it is important. I may not be a zealot of a particular philosophy (GNU, BSD, commercial, etc.) but I'm concerned enough to reject on principle something with the kind of licence that Borland put on Delphi a little while back [*]. Do I have anything like that on my Gentoo machines? I don't know because portage hasn't told me and I haven't bothered to check, but I do know that I don't on my NetBSD machines because pkgsrc only installs with the licences specified in ACCEPT_LICENSE in make.conf. Cheers David [*] something like "you can install this software for free [as in beer], but if so we reserve the right to come to your home/work and inspect your computer to check that you're using the software appropriately." Sure, this is probably a hypothetical worry, but less so if more software used it. Come to think of it isn't this what M$ wants to use? (except s/free/a fee/g) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
