On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 10:41:39PM +, Tim Haynes wrote:
>
> But, if you don't mind me being absolutely clear, putting the stuff up on a
> publicly accessible site based in the US knowing that folks from the dodgy
> 7 might come visiting is still acceptable?
>
Due to the dilligence of our
Jon Eisenstein wrote:
> If, according to policy, no package is allowed to modify
> environment variables, how should any package make the needed
> change? Furthermore, doesn't this violate the policy (in the same
> section) that no program can require an environment variable to be changed
> in orde
Previously Marco d'Itri wrote:
> But is it non-US/main or non-US/non-free?
non-US/main, since the license to the software itself is free.
Wichert.
--
/ Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \
| [EMAIL
On Jan 11, Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Programs which use patented algorithms that have a restrictied
> license must also be stored on "non-us", since that is located in a
> country where it is not allowed to patent algorithms.
But is it non-US/main or non-US/non-free?
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:38:40AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> That means if you use an algorithm that is patented in Germany
> the package will be in non-us? You better rename this "non-US"
> to "patented/main" and add the other needed "patented/contrib",
> "patented/non-free" and "patented/non-US
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Okay, one more final language change:
>
> Proposal is to change section 2.1.5 of the Debian policy to say:
>
>Non-free programs with cryptographic program code need to be stored
>on the "non-us" server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
>
>Programs w
Previously Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Any examples of such countries?
See an earlier post I made, that listed them all.
> * Tell all the FTP mirrors of non-US that must of them are no longer
> allowed to ship non-US (e.g. ftp.de.debian.org is located in Germany
> where it's not 100% forbidden to pa
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>...
>Programs which use patented algorithms that have a restrictied
>license also need to be stored on "non-us", since that is located
>in a country where it is not allowed to patent algorithms.
>...
Any examples of such countries?
> If t
Yay. More random crossposts amongst multiple lists. Bcc'ed to -project.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 01:13:32AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> In addition, packages which have a DFSG-compliant license and use
> a patented algorithm that does not have a restrictive license will
> also be allowed in ma
Okay, hopefully the final language change:
Proposal is to change section 2.1.5 of the Debian policy to say:
Non-free programs with cryptographic program code must be stored on
the "non-us" server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
Programs which use patented algorithms that have
Okay, one more final language change:
Proposal is to change section 2.1.5 of the Debian policy to say:
Non-free programs with cryptographic program code need to be stored
on the "non-us" server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
Programs which use patented algorithms that have
Previously Joey Hess wrote:
> You could just devolve it to the maintainers of the packages in question.
> It's not a great deal different from deciding if a package belongs in
> non-free, main, or cannot be put in debian at all.
But ftpmaster verifies that as well, that's why it takes a while be
Previously Brian Frederick Kimball wrote:
> Any news from RMS yet?
Afaik nobody directly asked him for an answer. Can someone please
do that? I know he's been waiting for some action from us on this.
Wichert.
--
/ Generally un
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > So for the export restrictions only a "non-US/non-free" will be needed.
>
> crypto export restrictions, yes. Right.
>
> > That means if you use an algorithm that is patented in Germany the package
> > will be in non-us? You better rename this "non-U
This is a slightly updated changed to reflect comments from people.
Debian developers can second this proposal for inclusion in the
policy text.
Proposal is to change section 2.1.5 of the Debian policy to say:
Non-free programs with cryptographic program code need to be stored
on the "non-
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> The exact restrictions are listed in some legal documentation; you can
> find it at the URL I gave earlier. We could indeed consider this on a
> per-package basis, but this would mean a lot of extra work for our
> ftpmaster team, which I don't think is warranted for non-fr
Previously Andrea Glorioso wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but does this mean that program which are
> under a DFSG-compliant *license* and which don't have
> patent-encumbered code will be allowed to stay in main?
Package which have a DFSG-compliant license and don't use a patented
algorithm wi
Robert Thomson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 10:41:39PM +, Tim Haynes wrote:
> > Robert Thomson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > So long as you don't mail a CD, cross a border, or force-feed to a mirror
> > > in one of the 7 victim countries, then you're fine.
> >
> > But, if you don't m
Previously Adam Heath wrote:
> What if the non-free program contains source, but is non-free for other
> reasons?
The exact restrictions are listed in some legal documentation; you can
find it at the URL I gave earlier. We could indeed consider this on a
per-package basis, but this would mean a lo
Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Seth Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > * Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001205 20:37]:
> > > Fortunately, things aren't very severe right now. And, certainly,
> > > I think that if we could pull a solution together by the time that
> > > Woody freezes, tha
Previously Adrian Bunk wrote:
> So for the export restrictions only a "non-US/non-free" will be needed.
crypto export restrictions, yes. Right.
> That means if you use an algorithm that is patented in Germany the package
> will be in non-us? You better rename this "non-US" to "patented/main" and
Robert Thomson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 01:10:55PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > > * DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
> > > from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
> > > one of 7 countries which are on a s
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>...
> Non-free programs with cryptographic program code need to be stored
> on the "non-us" server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
So for the export restrictions only a "non-US/non-free" will be needed.
> Programs which use
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 10:41:39PM +, Tim Haynes wrote:
> Robert Thomson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So long as you don't mail a CD, cross a border, or force-feed to a mirror
> > in one of the 7 victim countries, then you're fine.
>
> But, if you don't mind me being absolutely clear, putti
Previously Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> I was of the understanding that we would also have to notify the US of what is
> on our site.
We only need to tell them that our site has crypto stuff from what I
understand.
Wichert.
--
Robert Thomson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 01:10:55PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > > * DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
> > > from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
> > > one of 7 countr
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 01:10:55PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > * DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
> > from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
> > one of 7 countries which are on a special blacklist
>
> Of course th
I was of the understanding that we would also have to notify the US of what is
on our site.
At 12:51 PM 01-10-2001 -0800, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
In light of this I'm proposing to change section 2.1.5 of the
Debian policy to say:
Non-free programs with cryptographic program code need to be stored
on the "non-us" server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
Programs
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 22:11:21 +0100, Arthur Korn wrote:
> We do "consciously export" crypto to the blacklisted countries if we put
> it into main, don't we?
I doubt it. I strongly suspect Transmeta's lawyers have gone over this issue
before (witness ftp.kernel.org/pub/welcome.msg and
pub/linux/
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 13:10:55 -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > * DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
> > from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
> > one of 7 countries which are on a special blacklist
>
> Of course that
> "Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wichert> I've been reading through the current US export policies
Wichert> in between lately to see if we still need non-US, or at
Wichert> least in the way we currently have it (there is lots of
Wichert> info on the c
Package: debian-policy
I've been reading through the current US export policies in between
lately to see if we still need non-US, or at least in the way we
currently have it (there is lots of info on the crypto policies at
http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/Default.htm).
* DFSG free programs with
Hi
We do "consciously export" crypto to the blacklisted countries
if we put it into main, don't we?
Wichert Akkerman schrieb:
> * DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
> from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
> one of 7 countries which are on
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> Non-free programs with cryptographic program code need to be stored
> on the "non-us" server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
What if the non-free program contains source, but is non-free for other
reasons?
> Programs whi
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> * DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
> from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
> one of 7 countries which are on a special blacklist
Of course that raises the question: What can Debian do to prevent export
to one of
Previously Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> * DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and (re)distributed
> from the US now, as long as you don't consciously export it to
> one of 7 countries which are on a special blacklist
Extra info: those 7 are Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan
and
I've been reading through the current US export policies in between
lately to see if we still need non-US, or at least in the way we
currently have it (there is lots of info on the crypto policies at
http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/Default.htm).
* DFSG free programs with crypto can be made and
* Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010110 16:52]:
> I shall reopen #16484 and reassign it to libgmp3-dev.
> Martin Michlmayr, would you like to explain your behaviour ?
You're right, you should check whether the bug still applies to
libgmp3, and re-open it if it does. I forge
Debian Bug Tracking System writes ("Bug#16484 acknowledged by developer
(Package 'gmp' removed from Debian)"):
...
> It has been closed by one of the developers, namely
> Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
...
> You have filed a bug report against the package 'gmp'. This package
> is
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Eisenstein wr
ites:
>I recently filed a bug report (80092) against the nmh package regarding
>the location of its program files. It installs files into /usr/bin/mh,
>which isn't in the path, making running the program difficult until the
>reason is found.
The nm
41 matches
Mail list logo
