Re: m68k bootloader package(s)?
On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 10:17:39AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 01:41:16PM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> > > Right now the amiga and mac m68k bootloaders don't exist in the debian
> > > archive. This probably makes sense, because they aren't linux programs.
> > > However, it makes locating them and making them available for cdroms and
> > > such more trouble.
> > >
> > > The total size is about 2MB.
> > >
> > > What do ya'll think, should I put them in a package for convenience or
> > > just leave them on a website?
> >
> > I would recomend uploading them to contrib. After all, if i remember
> > well, both amiboot and apusboot are GPLed software, which just need a
> > foreign toolchain to build. The same will go for miboot, once we have
> > reimplemented the first boot stage of it.
>
> They should (are?) build with gcc, just not on the autobuilders.
No, stuff built with non-free java have been in contrib previously, so i
don't think that having a foreign OS builded stuff there should be a
problem. I don't think they are autobuilt anyway.
> Don't forget to include the needed libs + sources (ixemu.library for
> amiboot, right?) linked in.
Any idea what the licence for those are ?
> > See the thread about boot loaders i started, and the legal problems that
> > have to do with it. This means that debian-installer in main will not be
> > able to build depend on them, which is a shame, but we may create a
> > debian-installer-contrib or whatever, which will build the needed stuff
> > for them, as joeyh suggested.
> >
> > I have no idea how this can be regrouped into debian-cd or whatever
> > later on.
> >
> > Friendly,
> >
> > Sven Luther
>
> Is non-autobuildable a reason for contrib? As long as its a free
> toolchain and Debian has the source ...
As long as debian has the source, and that the source is free, then it
is good for contrib, no matter how you build it. Look at the java
situation for example.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: