On Fri, May 19, 2000 at 02:52:16AM -0400, Will Lowe wrote: > > So, it is not so much that Debian doesn't have permission to distribute > > a modified binary package, it is that doing so would open up a whole > > can'o'worms w.r.t. redistribution... so why go there and possibly cause > > problems for Debian's distributors, eh. > > That's exactly why it doesn't pass the DFSG test. It's really an > almost-moot point, really, since apt-get has come along and can auto-build > the package for you --it'd be tempting to have a fake pine package, which > would simply "apt-get -b source" the source and then install the .deb > files. I think similar schemes have actually been discussed several > times, always with the end result being that everyone thought that while > doing so would probably be legal, it'd violat the _spirit_ of the thing.
its also not trivially possible. a package's postinst cannot call dpkg/apt since there is a lock in place. > This is definitely a FAQ, though. don't use pine use mutt :P /me ducks -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
pgpaxXOjFv75n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
