| 1 |
On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 18:54 +0100, José Carlos Cruz Costa wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi everybody, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> If it's commercial, the company in question should (and must) allow an |
| 5 |
> ebuild for is product, like what happens with rpms and other packages. |
| 6 |
> Adding commercial ebuilds to portage is like tainting the kernel with |
| 7 |
> binary drivers. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Maybe a better solution comes with gensync? If companies want ebuilds, |
| 10 |
> sure. They go to the "commercial" portage. Hell, even put a price on |
| 11 |
> maintaining those ebuilds. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Remember that are a lot of people that don't want to use that kind of |
| 14 |
> software. There are people that doesn't have even xorg and have to |
| 15 |
> sync all the ebuilds from portage. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
This is what rsync excludes are for...there is no good reason to remove |
| 18 |
things like doom3 and UT2k4 from the tree for the sole reason that they |
| 19 |
are commercial packages. You don't want them...fine...exclude them. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Daniel Ostrow |
| 23 |
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees |
| 24 |
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel} |
| 25 |
dostrow@g.o |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives