Randy McMurchy wrote: > Hi all, > > Not too long ago there was a discussion about piping 'yes' through to > the installation script of packages to avoid having to agree to the > license. I believe the majority here determined that we really ought > not be doing that.
Reviewing, the majority consisted of Archaic, Randy, and Richard. I was the only one voicing an opinion that it was OK, at least in some form. > There are 4 packages in BLFS that pipe 'yes' to automate instructions. > The 'Net-Tools' package uses it to force the installation to use the > default configuration values, so this doesn't count. The other 3 > packages (JDK, FOP, FreeTTS) use it to bypass Sun's license agreement > on the respective package. > > I'm ready to remove them, but I'd like to get Bruce's input on this, > as he was one that never really agreed to their removal. I still prefer some comment in the book of how to use the yes program to provide an example to users in accordance with the educational goals of the book. However, since there were three strong opinions otherwise and no supporting opinions, go ahead and remove the yes construct from JDK, FOP, and FreeTTS. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
