packages with license problems
dobrek at itp.uni-hannover.de
Wed Apr 24 15:18:20 CEST 2002
Ok Artur has pointed many packages with a bad license.
>From some point of view there are 2 main types of them.
1. We cannot distribute binnaries in any form.
2. We cannot distribute binnaries in modify form.
Problem of the secound type is easy to solve
it is enought to distribute srpms. And everybody
will do rpm --rebuild *.sprm
But we should have a easy way to distinguish this
packages from the adders and builder should refuse
the idea of copying rpms to ftp. The solution is
to modify buildrpm.
This packages in source form should be on the oficial
pld images as well. How to mark tham I don't know.
The problem is with the first type. I thing once
in mplayer we had a solution. spec contain a macro
if during compilation This macro is set to
1 in %setup one can download the required sources using wget.
The point is that this macro should be always set to 0 on builder.
And this packages should also be distributed only in srpm form, hence
marked in the same way as packages from a point 1.
An optimist believes that we live in the best of all possible worlds.
A pessimist is sure that this must be so.
More information about the pld-devel-en