On 2013-07-11 13:41:47 +0000, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: > My understanding though that if Debian is the one making the modification > then Debian is the one responsible for making the source available. If the > end user is then modifying the source then they would subsequently need to > make those modifications available.
Is rebuilding the software seen as a way of modifying the source? Indeed autoconf things and even system .h files can have an influence on how to interpret the original source. Say, the original source has: foo(); and you are not satisfied with that. You would like to patch the source to have: bar(); But this means that you would have to provide the new source, via a URL or whatever. Instead, you could modify some system .h file by adding: #define foo bar In such a way, you wouldn't have touched the original source. But you have modified its behavior just by recompiling it against a modified system. In a similar way, instead of modifying a .h file, one could use a compiler wrapper... -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130712112635.gb16...@ioooi.vinc17.net
