On Thu, Jul 09, 1998 at 09:25:39AM -0500, Mark Mealman wrote: > On Thu, 09 Jul 1998, Tim Buller wrote: > >I'm trying to compile Pine 4.00 on a hamm/i386 system, and it wants to > > Is there any truth to the rumor that Debian's dist won't include pine because > of some restrictions in the license put out by Washington state?
yes and no. The problem with the license is that it doesn't allow distributions of binaries compiled from changed source. This means that a debian package of Pine can not be distibuted. This not only puts pine in non-free but also makes it the case that pine ONLY exists as a source package and not as a ready to go binary. however if you get the source..and use dpkg-buildpackage... you will get a nice debian package that you can install. I THINK someone made a package called pine-src which was in non-free which contained the source code and some build scripts...which would unpack it, and either compile pine or give you the tools to more easily compile pine. The upshot being that you can get it with dselect or apt and didn't need to manually get the source code package... unfortunaly there was a big rukus over this...some arging its good...others arguing that it violates policy... Whether it still exists is anybodies guess....give it a look and see -Steve > Washington's license doesn't seem any more restrictive than other public > domain > licenses. > > Mark > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > -- /* -- Stephen Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------ */ A favorite quote from a source I forget: "Only Microsoft can take an algorithim that has been under years of public scrutiny and weaken it to the point where the entire key space can be searched in 3 days" -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
