In order to let netatalk work with my Leopard system, I had to rebuild
the package following this guide.
http://www.kremalicious.com/2008/06/ubuntu-as-mac-file-server-and-time-
machine-volume/
It's so bad Ubuntu can't find a way to promote file sharing with such a
huge number of machines running
I followed the link above to the Debian bug, then scrolled to the end
and followed the links to a discussion at Sourceforge
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1035455&group_id=8642&atid=358642
someone used a compatible library that can be included in the 2.0.4
version of netat
If you feel that you can't distribute netatalk with uams_dhx.so then
that's fine, but for goodness sake, MAKE IT OBVIOUS TO THE END USER! I
just spent hours trying to figure out why the configuration that should
have been working according to every howto and man page I could find was
causing failu
The netatalk distributed with jaunty is still broken. It looks as if the
configure script hasn't been updated to know about the GNUTLS_DHX
#define used to select GNU libraries instead of OpenSSL.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received
With the increasing deployment of MacOS Leopard this issue is rapidly
becoming critical since Leopard insists on using encryption.
It is made worse by licence issues in debuild preventing local rebuild
from source.
Leopard also requires a suitable entry in /etc/avahi/services. While it is easy
I wholeheartedly agree with Keith Matthews here. This problem makes
interoperability with Mac OS X systems much more difficult for users.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
** Changed in: netatalk (Debian)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ub
This one is immensely annoying. I had the same journey as n8gray...
Anyway, I'll try to refrain from whining.
Is this one moving at all? didier said he would commit the boilerplate,
has anything happened since then?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
This one is ugly, looks like netatalk is practically unusable for file-
sharing until this gets fixed. Looks like the only reasonable way around
it is to rewrite about 6 or 7 different chunks of encryption code ~ 20
lines each, to use gnutls + gnucrypt instead of openssl, and I just
don't have the
Where is DES in gnutls?
Anyway I will commit the boilerplate: you can link netatalk with openSSL
tada, tada..
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subs
I agree that it should be made better visible to the end user that the
debian/ubuntu versions of netatalk don't support encrypted auth. Most
people use this authentication type so spending hours trying to diagnose
such problems is really a hassle. Until it gets fixed I suggest to do
something alo
excuse me if this is a silly question, but why is it ok for openssh-
client/openssh-server and apache2.2-common to depend on libssl and not
netatalk?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member
Can netatalk be moved to Multiverse, or another version of it with SSL
be put in Multiverse? Here's my logic - the reason you would want
Netatalk is primarily to run a file server in a heterogeneous network
environment with Mac clients. But, Macs of any recent vintage won't
connect to an AFP serv
** Changed in: netatalk (Ubuntu)
Importance: Medium => Wishlist
Status: New => Confirmed
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
No, as netatalk linked with openssl wouldn't be redistributable, which
is a main requirement for inclusion in multiverse.
One option is to convince netatalk upstream to add a openssl exception to the
license.
An other option is to try if netatalk builds and works with gnutls.
--
netatalk not bu
The netatalk distributed with jaunty is still broken. It looks as if the
configure script hasn't been updated to know about the GNUTLS_DHX
#define used to select GNU libraries instead of OpenSSL.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received
Can netatalk be moved to Multiverse, or another version of it with SSL
be put in Multiverse? Here's my logic - the reason you would want
Netatalk is primarily to run a file server in a heterogeneous network
environment with Mac clients. But, Macs of any recent vintage won't
connect to an AFP serv
** Changed in: netatalk (Ubuntu)
Importance: Medium => Wishlist
Status: New => Confirmed
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
excuse me if this is a silly question, but why is it ok for openssh-
client/openssh-server and apache2.2-common to depend on libssl and not
netatalk?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member
If you feel that you can't distribute netatalk with uams_dhx.so then
that's fine, but for goodness sake, MAKE IT OBVIOUS TO THE END USER! I
just spent hours trying to figure out why the configuration that should
have been working according to every howto and man page I could find was
causing failu
** Changed in: netatalk (Debian)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ub
I agree that it should be made better visible to the end user that the
debian/ubuntu versions of netatalk don't support encrypted auth. Most
people use this authentication type so spending hours trying to diagnose
such problems is really a hassle. Until it gets fixed I suggest to do
something alo
This one is ugly, looks like netatalk is practically unusable for file-
sharing until this gets fixed. Looks like the only reasonable way around
it is to rewrite about 6 or 7 different chunks of encryption code ~ 20
lines each, to use gnutls + gnucrypt instead of openssl, and I just
don't have the
Where is DES in gnutls?
Anyway I will commit the boilerplate: you can link netatalk with openSSL
tada, tada..
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subs
No, as netatalk linked with openssl wouldn't be redistributable, which
is a main requirement for inclusion in multiverse.
One option is to convince netatalk upstream to add a openssl exception to the
license.
An other option is to try if netatalk builds and works with gnutls.
--
netatalk not bu
This one is immensely annoying. I had the same journey as n8gray...
Anyway, I'll try to refrain from whining.
Is this one moving at all? didier said he would commit the boilerplate,
has anything happened since then?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
With the increasing deployment of MacOS Leopard this issue is rapidly
becoming critical since Leopard insists on using encryption.
It is made worse by licence issues in debuild preventing local rebuild
from source.
Leopard also requires a suitable entry in /etc/avahi/services. While it is easy
I wholeheartedly agree with Keith Matthews here. This problem makes
interoperability with Mac OS X systems much more difficult for users.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
If you feel that you can't distribute netatalk with uams_dhx.so then
that's fine, but for goodness sake, MAKE IT OBVIOUS TO THE END USER! I
just spent hours trying to figure out why the configuration that should
have been working according to every howto and man page I could find was
causing failu
The netatalk distributed with jaunty is still broken. It looks as if the
configure script hasn't been updated to know about the GNUTLS_DHX
#define used to select GNU libraries instead of OpenSSL.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received
With the increasing deployment of MacOS Leopard this issue is rapidly
becoming critical since Leopard insists on using encryption.
It is made worse by licence issues in debuild preventing local rebuild
from source.
Leopard also requires a suitable entry in /etc/avahi/services. While it is easy
I wholeheartedly agree with Keith Matthews here. This problem makes
interoperability with Mac OS X systems much more difficult for users.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
I followed the link above to the Debian bug, then scrolled to the end
and followed the links to a discussion at Sourceforge
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1035455&group_id=8642&atid=358642
someone used a compatible library that can be included in the 2.0.4
version of netat
In order to let netatalk work with my Leopard system, I had to rebuild
the package following this guide.
http://www.kremalicious.com/2008/06/ubuntu-as-mac-file-server-and-time-
machine-volume/
It's so bad Ubuntu can't find a way to promote file sharing with such a
huge number of machines running
Can netatalk be moved to Multiverse, or another version of it with SSL
be put in Multiverse? Here's my logic - the reason you would want
Netatalk is primarily to run a file server in a heterogeneous network
environment with Mac clients. But, Macs of any recent vintage won't
connect to an AFP serv
** Changed in: netatalk (Ubuntu)
Importance: Medium => Wishlist
Status: New => Confirmed
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
** Changed in: netatalk (Debian)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ub
excuse me if this is a silly question, but why is it ok for openssh-
client/openssh-server and apache2.2-common to depend on libssl and not
netatalk?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member
No, as netatalk linked with openssl wouldn't be redistributable, which
is a main requirement for inclusion in multiverse.
One option is to convince netatalk upstream to add a openssl exception to the
license.
An other option is to try if netatalk builds and works with gnutls.
--
netatalk not bu
This one is ugly, looks like netatalk is practically unusable for file-
sharing until this gets fixed. Looks like the only reasonable way around
it is to rewrite about 6 or 7 different chunks of encryption code ~ 20
lines each, to use gnutls + gnucrypt instead of openssl, and I just
don't have the
Where is DES in gnutls?
Anyway I will commit the boilerplate: you can link netatalk with openSSL
tada, tada..
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subs
This one is immensely annoying. I had the same journey as n8gray...
Anyway, I'll try to refrain from whining.
Is this one moving at all? didier said he would commit the boilerplate,
has anything happened since then?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
I agree that it should be made better visible to the end user that the
debian/ubuntu versions of netatalk don't support encrypted auth. Most
people use this authentication type so spending hours trying to diagnose
such problems is really a hassle. Until it gets fixed I suggest to do
something alo
** Changed in: netatalk (Debian)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ub
If you feel that you can't distribute netatalk with uams_dhx.so then
that's fine, but for goodness sake, MAKE IT OBVIOUS TO THE END USER! I
just spent hours trying to figure out why the configuration that should
have been working according to every howto and man page I could find was
causing failu
excuse me if this is a silly question, but why is it ok for openssh-
client/openssh-server and apache2.2-common to depend on libssl and not
netatalk?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member
If you feel that you can't distribute netatalk with uams_dhx.so then
that's fine, but for goodness sake, MAKE IT OBVIOUS TO THE END USER! I
just spent hours trying to figure out why the configuration that should
have been working according to every howto and man page I could find was
causing failu
excuse me if this is a silly question, but why is it ok for openssh-
client/openssh-server and apache2.2-common to depend on libssl and not
netatalk?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member
No, as netatalk linked with openssl wouldn't be redistributable, which
is a main requirement for inclusion in multiverse.
One option is to convince netatalk upstream to add a openssl exception to the
license.
An other option is to try if netatalk builds and works with gnutls.
--
netatalk not bu
Can netatalk be moved to Multiverse, or another version of it with SSL
be put in Multiverse? Here's my logic - the reason you would want
Netatalk is primarily to run a file server in a heterogeneous network
environment with Mac clients. But, Macs of any recent vintage won't
connect to an AFP serv
** Changed in: netatalk (Ubuntu)
Importance: Medium => Wishlist
Status: New => Confirmed
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
This one is immensely annoying. I had the same journey as n8gray...
Anyway, I'll try to refrain from whining.
Is this one moving at all? didier said he would commit the boilerplate,
has anything happened since then?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
** Changed in: netatalk (Debian)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ub
This one is ugly, looks like netatalk is practically unusable for file-
sharing until this gets fixed. Looks like the only reasonable way around
it is to rewrite about 6 or 7 different chunks of encryption code ~ 20
lines each, to use gnutls + gnucrypt instead of openssl, and I just
don't have the
Where is DES in gnutls?
Anyway I will commit the boilerplate: you can link netatalk with openSSL
tada, tada..
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subs
I agree that it should be made better visible to the end user that the
debian/ubuntu versions of netatalk don't support encrypted auth. Most
people use this authentication type so spending hours trying to diagnose
such problems is really a hassle. Until it gets fixed I suggest to do
something alo
Can netatalk be moved to Multiverse, or another version of it with SSL
be put in Multiverse? Here's my logic - the reason you would want
Netatalk is primarily to run a file server in a heterogeneous network
environment with Mac clients. But, Macs of any recent vintage won't
connect to an AFP serv
This one is immensely annoying. I had the same journey as n8gray...
Anyway, I'll try to refrain from whining.
Is this one moving at all? didier said he would commit the boilerplate,
has anything happened since then?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
In order to let netatalk work with my Leopard system, I had to rebuild
the package following this guide.
http://www.kremalicious.com/2008/06/ubuntu-as-mac-file-server-and-time-
machine-volume/
It's so bad Ubuntu can't find a way to promote file sharing with such a
huge number of machines running
I followed the link above to the Debian bug, then scrolled to the end
and followed the links to a discussion at Sourceforge
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1035455&group_id=8642&atid=358642
someone used a compatible library that can be included in the 2.0.4
version of netat
The netatalk distributed with jaunty is still broken. It looks as if the
configure script hasn't been updated to know about the GNUTLS_DHX
#define used to select GNU libraries instead of OpenSSL.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received
I agree that it should be made better visible to the end user that the
debian/ubuntu versions of netatalk don't support encrypted auth. Most
people use this authentication type so spending hours trying to diagnose
such problems is really a hassle. Until it gets fixed I suggest to do
something alo
With the increasing deployment of MacOS Leopard this issue is rapidly
becoming critical since Leopard insists on using encryption.
It is made worse by licence issues in debuild preventing local rebuild
from source.
Leopard also requires a suitable entry in /etc/avahi/services. While it is easy
I wholeheartedly agree with Keith Matthews here. This problem makes
interoperability with Mac OS X systems much more difficult for users.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
No, as netatalk linked with openssl wouldn't be redistributable, which
is a main requirement for inclusion in multiverse.
One option is to convince netatalk upstream to add a openssl exception to the
license.
An other option is to try if netatalk builds and works with gnutls.
--
netatalk not bu
** Changed in: netatalk (Ubuntu)
Importance: Medium => Wishlist
Status: New => Confirmed
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
The netatalk distributed with jaunty is still broken. It looks as if the
configure script hasn't been updated to know about the GNUTLS_DHX
#define used to select GNU libraries instead of OpenSSL.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received
In order to let netatalk work with my Leopard system, I had to rebuild
the package following this guide.
http://www.kremalicious.com/2008/06/ubuntu-as-mac-file-server-and-time-
machine-volume/
It's so bad Ubuntu can't find a way to promote file sharing with such a
huge number of machines running
I followed the link above to the Debian bug, then scrolled to the end
and followed the links to a discussion at Sourceforge
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1035455&group_id=8642&atid=358642
someone used a compatible library that can be included in the 2.0.4
version of netat
In order to let netatalk work with my Leopard system, I had to rebuild
the package following this guide.
http://www.kremalicious.com/2008/06/ubuntu-as-mac-file-server-and-time-
machine-volume/
It's so bad Ubuntu can't find a way to promote file sharing with such a
huge number of machines running
I followed the link above to the Debian bug, then scrolled to the end
and followed the links to a discussion at Sourceforge
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1035455&group_id=8642&atid=358642
someone used a compatible library that can be included in the 2.0.4
version of netat
I agree that it should be made better visible to the end user that the
debian/ubuntu versions of netatalk don't support encrypted auth. Most
people use this authentication type so spending hours trying to diagnose
such problems is really a hassle. Until it gets fixed I suggest to do
something alo
If you feel that you can't distribute netatalk with uams_dhx.so then
that's fine, but for goodness sake, MAKE IT OBVIOUS TO THE END USER! I
just spent hours trying to figure out why the configuration that should
have been working according to every howto and man page I could find was
causing failu
** Changed in: netatalk (Debian)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ub
excuse me if this is a silly question, but why is it ok for openssh-
client/openssh-server and apache2.2-common to depend on libssl and not
netatalk?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member
Can netatalk be moved to Multiverse, or another version of it with SSL
be put in Multiverse? Here's my logic - the reason you would want
Netatalk is primarily to run a file server in a heterogeneous network
environment with Mac clients. But, Macs of any recent vintage won't
connect to an AFP serv
This one is immensely annoying. I had the same journey as n8gray...
Anyway, I'll try to refrain from whining.
Is this one moving at all? didier said he would commit the boilerplate,
has anything happened since then?
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
No, as netatalk linked with openssl wouldn't be redistributable, which
is a main requirement for inclusion in multiverse.
One option is to convince netatalk upstream to add a openssl exception to the
license.
An other option is to try if netatalk builds and works with gnutls.
--
netatalk not bu
With the increasing deployment of MacOS Leopard this issue is rapidly
becoming critical since Leopard insists on using encryption.
It is made worse by licence issues in debuild preventing local rebuild
from source.
Leopard also requires a suitable entry in /etc/avahi/services. While it is easy
I wholeheartedly agree with Keith Matthews here. This problem makes
interoperability with Mac OS X systems much more difficult for users.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
** Changed in: netatalk (Ubuntu)
Importance: Medium => Wishlist
Status: New => Confirmed
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subscriber.
--
This one is ugly, looks like netatalk is practically unusable for file-
sharing until this gets fixed. Looks like the only reasonable way around
it is to rewrite about 6 or 7 different chunks of encryption code ~ 20
lines each, to use gnutls + gnucrypt instead of openssl, and I just
don't have the
Where is DES in gnutls?
Anyway I will commit the boilerplate: you can link netatalk with openSSL
tada, tada..
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subs
This one is ugly, looks like netatalk is practically unusable for file-
sharing until this gets fixed. Looks like the only reasonable way around
it is to rewrite about 6 or 7 different chunks of encryption code ~ 20
lines each, to use gnutls + gnucrypt instead of openssl, and I just
don't have the
Where is DES in gnutls?
Anyway I will commit the boilerplate: you can link netatalk with openSSL
tada, tada..
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is a direct subs
With the increasing deployment of MacOS Leopard this issue is rapidly
becoming critical since Leopard insists on using encryption.
It is made worse by licence issues in debuild preventing local rebuild
from source.
Leopard also requires a suitable entry in /etc/avahi/services. While it is easy
I wholeheartedly agree with Keith Matthews here. This problem makes
interoperability with Mac OS X systems much more difficult for users.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
The netatalk distributed with jaunty is still broken. It looks as if the
configure script hasn't been updated to know about the GNUTLS_DHX
#define used to select GNU libraries instead of OpenSSL.
--
netatalk not built with encrypted auth support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/26452
You received
In order to let netatalk work with my Leopard system, I had to rebuild
the package following this guide.
http://www.kremalicious.com/2008/06/ubuntu-as-mac-file-server-and-time-
machine-volume/
It's so bad Ubuntu can't find a way to promote file sharing with such a
huge number of machines running
I followed the link above to the Debian bug, then scrolled to the end
and followed the links to a discussion at Sourceforge
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1035455&group_id=8642&atid=358642
someone used a compatible library that can be included in the 2.0.4
version of netat
Hi,
thanks for the reply. I spent some time scratching my head over this
and delving into the weird world of incompatible free software
licenses. It seems strange that we have here a piece of free
software, which relies on another piece of free software; we can
distribute both of them, b
Hi,
thanks for the reply. I spent some time scratching my head over this
and delving into the weird world of incompatible free software
licenses. It seems strange that we have here a piece of free
software, which relies on another piece of free software; we can
distribute both of them, b
Hi,
thanks for the reply. I spent some time scratching my head over this
and delving into the weird world of incompatible free software
licenses. It seems strange that we have here a piece of free
software, which relies on another piece of free software; we can
distribute both of them, b
Hi,
thanks for the reply. I spent some time scratching my head over this
and delving into the weird world of incompatible free software
licenses. It seems strange that we have here a piece of free
software, which relies on another piece of free software; we can
distribute both of them, b
Hi,
thanks for the reply. I spent some time scratching my head over this
and delving into the weird world of incompatible free software
licenses. It seems strange that we have here a piece of free
software, which relies on another piece of free software; we can
distribute both of them, b
Hi,
thanks for the reply. I spent some time scratching my head over this
and delving into the weird world of incompatible free software
licenses. It seems strange that we have here a piece of free
software, which relies on another piece of free software; we can
distribute both of them, b
96 matches
Mail list logo
