Debian and the Pine license

1999-11-03 Thread Matthew Dalton
Hi there,

Can anyone tell me, in 500 words or less, what it is about the Pine
license that Debian includes it only as source and in non-free?

Matthew


Re: Debian and the Pine license

1999-11-03 Thread Matthew Dalton
Ignore this request... I just searched the Debian archives...

Matthew Dalton wrote:
 
 Hi there,
 
 Can anyone tell me, in 500 words or less, what it is about the Pine
 license that Debian includes it only as source and in non-free?
 
 Matthew
 
 --
 Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]  /dev/null


Re: Debian and the Pine license

1999-11-03 Thread aphro
i think it has something to do with them not allowing modified binaries to
be released, plain binaries are fine i believe, most other distros have
them..i remember slackware had it.  not sure what all patches debian
developers add to pine ..

nate

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]--
   Vice President Network Operations   http://www.firetrail.com/
  Firetrail Internet Services Limited  http://www.aphroland.org/
   Everett, WA 425-348-7336http://www.linuxpowered.net/
Powered By:http://comedy.aphroland.org/
Debian 2.1 Linux 2.0.36 SMPhttp://yahoo.aphroland.org/
-[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]--
11:52am up 75 days, 23:19, 1 user, load average: 0.34, 0.28, 0.28

On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Matthew Dalton wrote:

 Hi there,
 
 Can anyone tell me, in 500 words or less, what it is about the Pine
 license that Debian includes it only as source and in non-free?
 
 Matthew
 
 
 -- 
 Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]  /dev/null
 


Re: Debian and the Pine license

1999-11-03 Thread Matthew Dalton
I found out what I wanted to know...

Basically, the Pine license does not allow you to distribute modified
binaries. Debian cannot distribute an original Pine binary because it
violates the FSH (the config files are in /usr/lib). So instead,
Debian just provides the unmodified source with the diff so you can
compile it yourself.

I checked a RH5.2 installation... sure enough, the pine config files
were in /usr/lib. Looks like they don't really care about where Pine
puts its stuff, they just want to have it in their distribution.

aphro wrote:
 
 i think it has something to do with them not allowing modified binaries to
 be released, plain binaries are fine i believe, most other distros have
 them..i remember slackware had it.  not sure what all patches debian
 developers add to pine ..
 
 nate
 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]--
Vice President Network Operations   http://www.firetrail.com/
   Firetrail Internet Services Limited  http://www.aphroland.org/
Everett, WA 425-348-7336http://www.linuxpowered.net/
 Powered By:http://comedy.aphroland.org/
 Debian 2.1 Linux 2.0.36 SMPhttp://yahoo.aphroland.org/
 -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]--
 11:52am up 75 days, 23:19, 1 user, load average: 0.34, 0.28, 0.28
 
 On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Matthew Dalton wrote:
 
  Hi there,
 
  Can anyone tell me, in 500 words or less, what it is about the Pine
  license that Debian includes it only as source and in non-free?
 
  Matthew
 
 
  --
  Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]  /dev/null
 
 
 --
 Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]  /dev/null