RE: multiple binary packages (again)
When non-US was divided into non-US/main etc. it was
decreed, that /main & non-US/main together are the free
part, as determined by license. Placement into /main or
non-US/main is determined by export control laws which
have no bearing on licenses. So it is perfectly permissible
to have in /main a binary package whose sources are in
non-US/main. (It only means that the sources are in that
part of main that is not hosted in US.)
Hamish Moffatt <firstname.lastname@example.org> Fri, Aug 20, 1999 5:05 PM
> On Mon, Aug 16, 1999 at 06:11:59PM -0400, James Mastros wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 15, 1999 at 01:55:33AM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> > > On Sat, 14 Aug 1999, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > > Apart from that, isn't there a non-US problem with the
> > > > SSL support ? Take
> > > > care not to install in main something that could not be
> > > > exported by US
> > > > residents.
> > > right, i have to break source in two anyway. i can't put
> > > source in main
> > > distribution that require some non-US packages, can i?
> > No, but you can put source in non-US/main that builds both main and
> > non-US/main binary packages.
> Can you? Isn't main supposed to be free standing? Clearly the source
> can't go in main, so the binaries can't either.
> xpdf and xpdf-i have the same .orig.tar.gz. Mind you, I wouldn't build
> them from the same source package even if I could; too hard to apply
> the -i patches during build.