On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 21:22:54 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wonder if with ACCEPT_LICENSES it would be possible to get a way to > represent this issue, like a "unredistributable" fake license, > disabled during GRP building for instance, so that the packages > needing that license wouldn't be built in binary form and > redistributed by us. > > Any proposal on this issue? Well, we have a bindist USE flags for more or less this purpose -- it's hardly an optimal solution, but in this case from the sound of things the problematic linking could be disabled when building a binary distribution. Obviously though that doesn't work in the more general case where said linkage is not based on an optional dep, so something better would be useful. I'm not sure LICENSE is the right way forward here -- it would work with the currently proposed syntax, but seems somehow an abuse of the system. On the other hand, though, I don't have a better option to hand at the moment, and it is a licensing issue after all... -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
