[gentoo-dev] Re: GPL violations with net-misc/vpnc?
Alexis Ballier [EMAIL PROTECTED]: While we are not distributing binaries, I could easily add a USE flag to enable it; the user compiles it himself, so it is all fine. But now regard the existence of binary hosts, are they distributions of then illegal binaries? isn't bindist useflag made for this purpose ? Great. Thanks...so what is common practice? Should the ebuild die, telling people a feature will not be included or just exclude it with an ewarn only? V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GPL violations with net-misc/vpnc?
On Fri, 2007-31-08 at 16:31 +0200, Christian Faulhammer wrote: Alexis Ballier [EMAIL PROTECTED]: While we are not distributing binaries, I could easily add a USE flag to enable it; the user compiles it himself, so it is all fine. But now regard the existence of binary hosts, are they distributions of then illegal binaries? isn't bindist useflag made for this purpose ? Great. Thanks...so what is common practice? Should the ebuild die, telling people a feature will not be included or just exclude it with an ewarn only? With bindist, you should just disable any non-distributable feature and print a ewarn.. Dieing is not nice since its used to build the stages, etc. -- Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Re: GPL violations with net-misc/vpnc?
Christian Faulhammer wrote: Alexis Ballier [EMAIL PROTECTED]: While we are not distributing binaries, I could easily add a USE flag to enable it; the user compiles it himself, so it is all fine. But now regard the existence of binary hosts, are they distributions of then illegal binaries? Definitely. IIRC distribution within an organisation doesn't count as distribution under the GPL but I am not a lawyer. (Nor do I like that acronym: my eyeballs survive reading it tho ;) Any public binhost like tinderbox[1] would be unable to make binaries available. isn't bindist useflag made for this purpose ? Great. Thanks...so what is common practice? Should the ebuild die, telling people a feature will not be included or just exclude it with an ewarn only? Dunno what common practice is, but from a user perspective, it's much better if the binhost compiles without the feature than dies altogether. An ewarn/elog about bindist is sufficient for any competent admin (and newbs can search site:forums.gentoo.org or whinge on IRC, where they shall be gently enlightened ;) [1] http://tinderbox.dev.gentoo.org/html/default-linux/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: GPL violations with net-misc/vpnc?
Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Great. Thanks...so what is common practice? Should the ebuild die, telling people a feature will not be included or just exclude it with an ewarn only? With bindist, you should just disable any non-distributable feature and print a ewarn.. Dieing is not nice since its used to build the stages, etc. Olivier, Steve, thanks. So I will just emit an ewarn in the ebuild...that way Gentoo will be the only major distribution shipping hybrid auth in vpnc. Yay! Other source based will offer it, too, though. V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
