Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#5469 - License of DJB software

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Roberto Alsina (ralsina) - Friday, 29 September 2006, 17:11 GMT
Last edited by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Saturday, 18 November 2006, 13:20 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Paul Mattal (paul)
Architecture not specified
Severity Critical
Priority High
Reported Version 0.7.2 Gimmick
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

I recently noticed that Arch is distributing, in extra, packages for djbdns and daemontools.

Like most other DJB software, the licensing of those packages is, at least, difficult.

You can only distribute binaries if they install in the rather strange places the install script wants them to be (http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html).

I tried to contact the listed maintainer (eric@archlinux.org) but all I got was a bounce.

If this has been worked out with DJB I would like to know it, since I am packaging qmail and other similar software that has the same problems.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Roman Kyrylych (Romashka)
Friday, 09 February 2007, 16:18 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Friday, 29 September 2006, 21:40 GMT
As far as I know, these packages really do void the DJB license and should be removed, just like what happened to qmail a while ago.
Comment by Roberto Alsina (ralsina) - Friday, 29 September 2006, 22:03 GMT
Maybe just move them to unsupported? I can adopt them there if you want, and that distribution is not against the license.
Comment by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Friday, 29 September 2006, 22:10 GMT
unsupported would be okay, as there's no binary redistribution anymore then.
Comment by Varun Acharya (ganja_guru) - Monday, 16 October 2006, 15:34 GMT
I really don't know much about this, but can't we install the binaries in the odd location that the author wants and just ln -s to a more convenient location (such as /usr/bin) ?
Comment by Michal Krenek (Mikos) - Thursday, 19 October 2006, 12:04 GMT
I am strongly against installing them to odd locations, this is clearly against Arch Linux KISS philosophy. D. J. Bernstein and his attitude is one of the most stupid things I have ever seen in Linux/UNIX world, we should'n withdraw good distribution principles only because someones stupidity. Let it go to unsupported, it will be OK there...
Comment by AqD (aquila_deus) - Friday, 27 October 2006, 08:50 GMT
Hmmm but his page for djbdns and the sources contain no license info, or link to the above page you mentioned.

Can't we just pretend those things don't exist? ;)
Comment by Dale Blount (dale) - Friday, 03 November 2006, 16:39 GMT
+1 on the move to unsupported.
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Friday, 24 November 2006, 01:11 GMT
I agree.
Comment by Kevin Piche (kpiche) - Friday, 24 November 2006, 18:17 GMT
Agree. DJB writes crap anyways and better software can be used.
Comment by Anonymous Submitter - Monday, 11 December 2006, 12:27 GMT
I agree.
+1 on the move to unsupported.
Comment by Glenn Matthys (RedShift) - Thursday, 14 December 2006, 21:17 GMT
I agree with moving it to unsupported.

However, just a note I'd like to leave behind, I can understand DJB's vision on things, he would like see, wherever you go, if his software is installed, it's on *every* computer the same.
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Thursday, 01 February 2007, 00:25 GMT
I'll be moving djbdns and daemontools to unsupported on Sunday, 2/4.

Loading...