Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 11:22:15 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: cperciva@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /usr/portsnap vs. /var/db/portsnap Message-ID: <20050807.112215.83519787.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <42F63113.5020600@freebsd.org> References: <20050807.211240.75793221.hrs@allbsd.org> <20050807.100211.20316746.imp@bsdimp.com> <42F63113.5020600@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <42F63113.5020600@freebsd.org>
Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > However, one possible gotcha in setting this up is licensing. Do you
: > know that your distribution of binary snapshot complies with the GPL
: > which requires that you also provide the sources when you do this?
: > The project already has some issues with GPLd ports when it builds
: > binaries. Are distfiles part of portsnap? If so, then you are safe
: > for the standard licenses...
:
: Huh? Isn't the ports tree BSD-licensed?
I keep seeing snapshots and build. I still don't know if this
distributes sources or binaries. My concern was if it distributed
binaries.
The tree itself has no license, but is presuemed to be BSD-license.
The actual binaries built from the tree, however, have a zillion
different licenses...
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050807.112215.83519787.imp>