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

Re: packaging pine

On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Ben Armstrong wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 04:57:33PM +0100, Michael De Nil wrote:
> > people on the #debian chat told me that it sucks, but I think it's a great
> > mailclient and that the user should find out if he likes it or not.
> > is there any other special reason ?
> It sucks for licensing reasons, not technical reasons.
> > otherwise I would be happy to pack it, :)
> Pine cannot go into Debian, not even non-free.  It was dropped many moons
> ago.  Search the debian-devel archives several years back if you are
> interested in details.

I really hate this kind of FUD, and nothing said in this thread since has
repaired this dull misconception.

Pine IS distributed by Debian in non-free as a source package only because
of license restrictions. Only modified binary distribution is restricted.

Apt-get is prefectly capable of obtaining, installing, and building the
pine package on your machine from a source download. Hense the validitiy
of other packages suggesting pine.


P.S. This e-mail was produced on that crappy useless program called Pine.
_-_-_-_-_-   Author of "Dwarf's Guide to Debian GNU/Linux"  _-_-_-_-_-_-
_-                                                                    _-
_- aka   Dale Scheetz                   Phone:   1 (850) 656-9769     _-
_-       Flexible Software              11000 McCrackin Road          _-
_-       e-mail:  dwarf@polaris.net     Tallahassee, FL  32308        _-
_-                                                                    _-
_-_-_-_-_-  Released under the GNU Free Documentation License   _-_-_-_-
              available at: http://www.polaris.net/~dwarf/

Reply to: