Re: Intenet to package tuxeyes
On Tue, Apr 06, 1999 at 09:49:16AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On 5 Apr 1999, Rene Hojbjerg Larsen wrote:
> > email@example.com wrote:
> > > Alright, I'll admit -- it's ... one of those packages
> > > (like xeyes and xteddy) -- in fact, that's what it's
> > > a combination of. xpenguin and xeyes to be exact.
> > >
> > > But it's just *COOL* and I had to make it available.
> That sounds very funny and as the xteddy maintainer I'd
> be happy if you would complete the funny stuff on our desktop.
> > > Lemme know if somebody else is working on it -- I'm
> > > building now, but will upload in a few days if
> > > nobody else calls dibs.
> I'll definitely not working on it and don't have any plan to
> do it but an URL would be interesting.
Hrmm -- I found it on freshmeat -- just do a search for tuXeyes.
> > You should note that there are a few license issues:
> > * The program is GPL but uses the QT toolkit. This means that we cannot
> > legally distribute binaries of it unless the license is changed to
> > "GPL with permission to link with QT" or something similar. You'll
> > have to talk with the author about that (he may not be aware of the
> > problem at all).
> > * Since the program depends on the non-free QT library, it'll have to go
> > in contrib.
> Knowing the xteddy source I would suggest to have a look at the source.
> In my opinion there couldn't be so much QT stuff in it that it couldn't
> be replaced withh Imlib or GdkImlib stuff. May be it is a work which
> could be done in less time than the packaging effort will take.
Hehehe -- perhaps so, but it's one thing to build a .deb from somebody
else's source, and quite another to write the source yourself. *wince*
I'm afraid any X coding, whether it be qt, imlib, whatever, is still
*WAY* beyond my meager coding experience.
> Kind regards