[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [upx-nrv] Non-free package licenses and replacements



On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 02:29:39AM +0200, Niklas Vainio wrote:
> I've put up a web page listing possible replacements for packages currently in
> non-free. There are still lot of blanks - please give suggestions. Perhaps this
> page can help in the discussion about removing non-free.
> 
> Also included is explanation why the package is in non-free. This is based
> on the summary Craig Sanders posted in debian-vote some time ago. I have
> added comments from mailing lists and some of my own. In the discussion it
> was noted that status of some packages is unclear and we might not have
> permission to distribute them at all.
> 
> Now I'm asking for suggestions for replacements and comments on whether some
> packages should be either moved to main or removed completely because of the
> license or what kind of changes to the license we could suggest to upstream.
> 

Notes on the upx-nrv package:

As far as I know, this is the free sources also used in upx-ucl,
but linked against an additional, non-free compression library.

The benefits of compressing with upx-nrv rather than the free
upx-ucl is supposedly a slightly better compression ratio.
However it is unclear if the free version can always decompress
files compressed by the non-free version.  If it can then there
should be no problem, but if it cannot, then the ability to
decompress the non-free format is important for things like
virus checking of e-mails (a large percentage of all e-mail
viruses are upx packed, and I don't think the virus-writers care
too much about licenses...).

So depending on this compatibility issue, this may be very easy
or very hard to drop!

Keep up the good work

Jakob


-- 
This message is hastily written, please ignore any unpleasant wordings,
do not consider it a binding commitment, even if its phrasing may
indicate so. Its contents may be deliberately or accidentally untrue.
Trademarks and other things belong to their owners, if any.



Reply to: