1 |
Just to clarify, the contenders for no binpkg would be the |
2 |
following, potentially more. |
3 |
|
4 |
- ebuilds that are fetch restricted |
5 |
- ebuilds that installs files unchanged, like kernel sources |
6 |
- Binary ebuilds, -bin, that just use src_install and do not build |
7 |
anything |
8 |
|
9 |
There may be some other cases, but I think that covers the main ones. |
10 |
The first case, should NEVER, not even optionally be allowed to be |
11 |
binpkg. That is re-distributing something that is fetch restricted. If |
12 |
it cannot be mirrored, I doubt it can legally be re-packaged. |
13 |
|
14 |
The later 2 could be "optional" defaulted to not build, but could be |
15 |
forced. There is little benefit at that point but some may prefer those |
16 |
be a binpkg. |
17 |
|
18 |
I have no problem with it being optional. |
19 |
|
20 |
-- |
21 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |