Hello, > How come Linux distributions can provide binary packages for kdepim? I am not sure about that. The thing is that most of openssl use from KDE is swept under the carpet by avoiding any standard linking (only linking at runtime is used), and most project are moving to Qt SSL module instead. Not that anything of it changes the license restrictions.
The thing is that I was thus not convinced about the fact of being strictly able to distribute all kde ports, so I looked by myself, and only the ones where I was pretty sure of myself are now distributed, but I may have missed something. However, the main point stays: most licenses in KDE are GPL-2+, without exceptions about openssl, so that they inherently conflict. > Would it be feasible to isolate the io-slave submodule and distribute it > separately? If not, there's always the solution to provide a kdepim variant > like ffmpeg+gpl2+nonfree which can only be installed from source? Not with a variant, as ports can’t require specific variants. A subport may however be possible, with changes of the Portfiles declaring a dependency to kdepimlibs to a binary one (bin:foo) instead of a port one (port:foo). Cheers, Nicolas _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
