why not put pine in non-free?
Why not put pine in non-free? Other distributions ship with pine... Alec
Re: why not put pine in non-free?
On Sat, Dec 15, 2001 at 04:00:58PM -0500, Alec wrote: Why not put pine in non-free? Other distributions ship with pine... Because you aren't allowed to ship modified pine binaries. See the thread on debian-devel a few days ago for more information. greets, Stephen R?ger -- ... and on the third day he rebooted into Linux-1.3.84 (Linus Torvalds, Easter Kernel Release 1996) pgpMuV4dmKJoL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: why not put pine in non-free?
On Sat, Dec 15, 2001 at 04:00:58PM -0500, Alec wrote: Why not put pine in non-free? Other distributions ship with pine... PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE read the past threads on this. You cannot ship modified versions of pine binaries. Building pine without modification on Debian will leave it broken in some cases (depending on how you use it), so it is pointless to do so. Ben -- .--===-=-==-=---==-=-. / Ben Collins--Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: why not put pine in non-free?
On Sat, 15 Dec 2001, Alec wrote: Why not put pine in non-free? Other distributions ship with pine... Because Debian has code modifications that seem to help it work with Debian xterms and whatnot better, Pine's licence doesn't allow binary redistribution of this nature. -- Baloo
