Re: [gentoo-dev] Xbox architecture support

[Chris Bainbridge]

On Sunday 23 May 2004 00:07, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Saturday 22 May 2004 06:26 pm, Ed Schouten wrote:
> > Could you please reconsider your thoughts on Xbox-Linux support?
> > Searching for interested developers wouldn't take too much effort.
>
> i havent seen anyone come forth and volunteer other than Shallax and he has
> since made a decent fork into Gentoox
> -mike

If you checked the "xbox support" bug report Ed referred to you'd see that at 
least 3 people (apart from Shallax) have so far offered to help maintain xbox 
support in Gentoo. As we have also said, gentoox is not gentoo - it has its 
own packaging system, and is quite constrained in the type of systems it can 
build (no xbox ebuilds - binaries are downloaded, no 2.6 or alternative 
kernels, etc.). Now in the bug report Shallax has gone into why it was made 
this way (seemingly a lack of support from other gentoo devs), but 
regardless, it is not the gentoo that we are looking for.

Jon Portnoy suggested that we should start some serious                  
discussions about whether:

a) is xbox support worth it? Do people want to run gentoo on their xboxes? 

For me the answer is yes, but I can't say for people in general. Maybe there 
should be a vote.

b) The potential legal ramifications

I second Ed. If xbox linux were legally dodgy, Microsoft would've taken action 
against them by now. I could point out that there are already ebuilds of more 
dubious legality in gentoo (win32codecs?). My view is that ebuilds are just 
sets of detailed instructions and are no more illegal than chemistry books on 
drug manufacturing.. and if we were going to go to the extent of not having 
ebuilds for fear of lawsuits we should really stop shipping those pesky 
kernel ebuilds in case they contain some companies proprietory code. 

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list