Roland Mainz wrote:
> 2. The same question for the SFW gate - AFAIK the answer should be "yes"
> since stuff like "configure" could pick-up "shcomp" automagically
> anyway...
One additional complication for SFW before you start shipping compiled
shell scripts - when a shell script is licensed under a license that
requires providing source (GPL, CDDL, etc.), the normal form is automatically
compliant - the script is the source, so no additional source publication
is required - any scripts that get compiled however need to be sure that
we're still complying with the license terms in cases where it was assumed
that no more was needed than providing the uncompiled script. I don't
know if this is actually a problem in SFW, if any packages only provide
scripts but not other sources that would need to be published, but it's
still a quick check that needs to be made before you switch to compiling
scripts.
(And of course, compiling a script loses one of the main benefits of providing
a script in the first place - for the admin/end user to see what it does, and
maybe even modify it - if we wanted an opaque binary, we'd write in C instead,
but that's something probably best discussed on sysadmin-discuss for any
scripts you want to replace with their compiled forms.)
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
