| 1 |
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:17 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." |
| 2 |
<phajdan.jr@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> I'm looking at <https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=538628> which |
| 4 |
> suggests removing elog messages chromium has for bindist: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> This is the snippet we use in the ebuild: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> if use bindist; then |
| 9 |
> elog "bindist enabled: H.264 video support will be disabled." |
| 10 |
> else |
| 11 |
> elog "bindist disabled: Resulting binaries may not be legal to |
| 12 |
> re-distribute." |
| 13 |
> fi |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> I think I used existing examples, e.g. from firefox ebuilds. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Anyway, do you consider the part when bindist is disabled necessary? I'm |
| 18 |
> open to removing it if it's not needed. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> While we're discussing this, do you consider the message when bindist is |
| 21 |
> enabled useful? bindist is described in chromium's metadata.xml: |
| 22 |
> "Disable patent-encumbered HTML5 video codecs". |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I would like to remove the elog for a couple of reasons: |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
1. The use flag description is there for whoever cares to read it. |
| 28 |
There is no need to alert the user every time. |
| 29 |
2. We are not lawyers, and I have no business giving legal advice |
| 30 |
about patent law which varies from country to country. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
To take it one step further: I think it would make more sense to call |
| 33 |
the flag "h264" or something similar. We could then set |
| 34 |
RESTRICT="h264? ( bindist )" if we want to give some indication that |
| 35 |
it is not appropriate for binary redistribution. |
Archives