On 02/23/2015 05:40 PM, Thomas Strobel wrote:
So, how should we deal with software that can be downloaded "freely", but where the user has to accept a certain license? Is the nixpkgs option "config.allowUnfree = true;" meant exactly for that cases?
Well, you *always* have to accept the license for any package. Free ones are "accepted automatically", and for others you have allowUnfree and friends (even general allowUnfreePredicate).
FWIW, I'm fairly strongly against inclusion of any package that cannot be installed automatically, i.e., anything that uses requireFile. The reason being that if a package shows up in "nix-env -qa", then "nix-env -i <package>" should Just Work.
I personally do try to avoid unfree packages (or worse, non-redistributable/requireFile ones). They bring less benefit in nixpkgs than free ones, but note that in default installation they will *not* be shown by "nix-env -qa" (unless the user sets allowUnfree*).
Vladimir
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
