Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Message-ID: <3ED5C5F4.7080208@lapo.it> Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 10:33:56 +0200 From: Lapo Luchini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030526 X-Accept-Language: it, en, fr, es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: qmail port successfull References: <1854.212.0.200.22.1054180564.mtc@mail.moldtelecom.md> <20030529040027.GA14729@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20030529040027.GA14729@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Christopher Faylor wrote: >>To cgf: >>Yes, I must forget about sharing Win32 binaries. >> >> >That's a really regrettable outcome of the qmail license. Oh well. > >cgf > As far as i remember some linux distro do have qmail in binary form... they asked DJB and (as far as I remember) he added to the license the "exception". Woulnd't this be acceptable on "our platform" too? > Exception: You are permitted to distribute a precompiled var-qmail > package if (1) installing the > package produces /exactly/ the same /var/qmail hierarchy as a user > would obtain by downloading, compiling, and installing > qmail-1.03.tar.gz, fastforward-0.51.tar.gz, and > dot-forward-0.71.tar.gz; (2) the package behaves correctly, i.e., the > same way as normal qmail+fastforward+dot-forward installations on all > other systems; and (3) the package's creator warrants that he has made > a good-faith attempt to ensure that the package behaves correctly. It > is not acceptable to have qmail > working differently on different machines; any variation is a bug. If > there's something about a system (compiler, libraries, kernel, > hardware, whatever) that changes qmail's behavior, then that platform > is /not/ supported, and you are /not/ permitted to distribute binaries. This would require of course to have a binary with no vpopmail support... =( P.S.: maybe it's just that I'm using FreeBSD more and more, but its "ports system" seems to me better each time I think of it (it is a collection of some 8000 Makefiles that contains instruction to download source form original website, apply patch if necessary, compile and install as a system package). It is true, of course, that most of the people out there wouln't like to compile things, but when it's an automatic non-interactive script, it can be a little better maybe. This reminds me that maybe it could be cool to have an "install" option in "type 2 packages" that installs them directly, without bothering to have a "fake" local setup.ini, starting setup, let it install the package... this would need some command line "installed package db" management of some kind. Or it is already out there, only I didn't notice it? -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini lapo@lapo.it (PGP & X.509 keys available) http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796) -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/