On Thu, 4 Feb 1999, Deirdre Saoirse wrote:
> It is a violation of the license to distribute binaries -- and for good
I thought it was released under GPL, in which case I thought that the only
requirement was that the source was available from the same place.
Also, there are source rpms in the same place, which is what I would
recommend using. There is no advantage in downloading the source and
compiling it yourself unless you at least look at the source (I do, most
people probably don't).
> reasons. A binary *may* have a back door or hack added. You want to verify
> the PGP signature of *any* security product before installing it.
>
Of course. RPM supports PGP signatures.
--
Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bones: "The man's DEAD, Jim!"
