| 1 |
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 10:05:00 -0400 |
| 2 |
Michael Cummings <mcummings@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 13:36 +0200, Simon Stelling wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > Every license which a package in the portage tree depends on gets a |
| 7 |
> > package in the ``txt-licenses/`` category. Its ebuild must install |
| 8 |
> > the license text to ``/usr/shared/licenses/``. The initial version |
| 9 |
> > shall be 1 if there is no version specified. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> This doesn't make sense to me. I have a copy of every license used in |
| 12 |
> the portage tree already in /usr/portage/licenses - why dup that |
| 13 |
> again? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Plus the copies in /usr/share/doc. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> We already have an existing LICENSE keywording in the ebuilds, |
| 18 |
> why not just focus on patching portage to allow a make.conf variable |
| 19 |
> for allowed licenses and block based on that? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Sounds good enough to me. Perhaps two variables; ALLOW_LICENSES and |
| 22 |
DENY_LICENSES (with wildcard support). |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Kevin F. Quinn |
Archives