I am finishing off some packaging I did awhile ago for
the procheck structure validation suite. The source code
for this software resides on a really slow ftp server
which causes the normal fink source download method to time
out. In particular, for the entry
Source:
On 19/04/2009, at 11:54, Jack Howarth wrote:
(...)
succeeds. Do we have any settings in fink to change the timeout of
the curl download or specify
that a particular file should be downloaded with wget instead?
You may specify
DownloadMethod: wget
in /sw/etc/fink.conf.
There is no option
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 12:00:43PM -0300, Monic Polynomial wrote:
On 19/04/2009, at 11:54, Jack Howarth wrote:
(...)
succeeds. Do we have any settings in fink to change the timeout of the
curl download or specify
that a particular file should be downloaded with wget instead?
You may
On 19/04/2009, at 12:00, Monic Polynomial wrote:
There is no option in fink.conf to specify connection timeouts.
However, you may specify a different connection timeout in /sw/lib/
perl5/Fink/NetAccess.pm at your own risk.
My bad, checking NetAccess.pm again I found a /sw/etc/fink.conf option
On 19/04/2009, at 12:06, Jack Howarth wrote:
Yuck. This source code is restricted so we can't host it and it will
be a huge pain to have to deal with every user complaining that they
can't download the source. Certainly we must have some other option
available on the info file level? It seem
It's not very pretty, but I can use...
Package: procheck
Version: 3.5.4
Revision: 1
Maintainer: Jack Howarth howa...@bromo.med.uc.edu
Source: none
#Source: ftp://ftp.biochem.ucl.ac.uk/pub/procheck/tar3_5/procheck.tar.Z
#Source-MD5: 3d12962079e42b0fa275424fabb74197
BuildDepends: gcc44, wget,
Argh. I forgot to cc the list. I am able to hack around this with...
Package: procheck
Version: 3.5.4
Revision: 1
Maintainer: Jack Howarth howa...@bromo.med.uc.edu
Source: none
#Source: ftp://ftp.biochem.ucl.ac.uk/pub/procheck/tar3_5/procheck.tar.Z
#Source-MD5: 3d12962079e42b0fa275424fabb74197
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 12:38:53PM -0300, Monic Polynomial wrote:
On 19/04/2009, at 12:06, Jack Howarth wrote:
Yuck. This source code is restricted so we can't host it and it will
be a huge pain to have to deal with every user complaining that they
can't download the source. Certainly we must
Looking at the procheck homepage, I am not sure that you can legally
package this software *at all*. Specifically, this clause:
Users must sign a Confidentiality Agreement (included with the source
code in file confid.txt)
I.e., it is not just restricted software, it is not at all free or
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 07:22:30PM +0200, Max Horn wrote:
Looking at the procheck homepage, I am not sure that you can legally
package this software *at all*. Specifically, this clause:
Users must sign a Confidentiality Agreement (included with the source
code in file confid.txt)
I.e.,
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 07:22:30PM +0200, Max Horn wrote:
Looking at the procheck homepage, I am not sure that you can legally
package this software *at all*. Specifically, this clause:
Users must sign a Confidentiality Agreement (included with the source
code in file confid.txt)
I.e.,
Jack Howarth wrote:
Argh. I forgot to cc the list. I am able to hack around this with...
Package: procheck
Version: 3.5.4
Revision: 1
Maintainer: Jack Howarth howa...@bromo.med.uc.edu
Source: none
#Source: ftp://ftp.biochem.ucl.ac.uk/pub/procheck/tar3_5/procheck.tar.Z
#Source-MD5:
Max,
One other comment. I think this does fail within
the Restricted license as long as the user if forced
to agree to the terms. The fact that software is openly
available for download as long as the terms are followed
makes the source code freely accessible. Otherwise it
would require
Max,
Actually this packaging is even better. I download the confid.doc
and the sources aren't even downloaded unless the user agrees to the
terms...
Package: procheck
Version: 3.5.4
Revision: 1
Maintainer: Jack Howarth howa...@bromo.med.uc.edu
Source: none
#Source:
Hi Jack,
I just downloaded and read there license in detail. And no, displaying
their confid.doc file before installation is *not* sufficient to
comply with their license.
In particular, the moment you add this .info file to SVN, our master
mirrors would automatically start holding a copy
Max,
If a info file has...
Source: none
and the original source lines are commented, how could anything
possibly be stocked on the fink servers? All downloads are
done explicitly with in the source scripts.
Jack
How about the following revision. It contains Source: none so nothing is
saved on any servers and it keeps the source tarball in the build directory
and destroys it at the end of the build. This places us as in the same
situation as ccp4 where one assumes that the agreement to the license will
be
Jack,
The ccp4 package is labeled License: Commercial rather than
License: Restrictive, and that may be appropriate here as well --
as Max pointed out to you, this package does not meet anybody's
definition of open source.
As far as circumventing the usual fink tools for downloading goes,
License: Restrictive blocks fink from mirroring the source
tarball. So that would be sufficient to avoid a simple licensing
restriction on redistribution. However, user's fink would still
download the source before requiring the user to accept the license,
so that itself may still be a license
19 matches
Mail list logo
