Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 20:14:44 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <youshi10@u.washington.edu> To: perryh@pluto.rain.com Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, tedm@toybox.placo.com Subject: Re: The worst error message in history belongs to... BIND9! Message-ID: <468C6224.2090003@u.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <468c3375.7kSLbuENAWH%2BmQuo%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <BMEDLGAENEKCJFGODFOCKEDGCAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> <468c3375.7kSLbuENAWH%2BmQuo%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote:
>>> If one is going to require the installation of something that may
>>> not be part of a base system, that something might as well be bash :)
>>>
>> Except that bash requires all the icky GNU utilities to build so you
>> have to GNUify your system.
>>
>
> And perl doesn't? It was GPL last I knew.
>
The entirety of Perl falls under the GPL and Artistic license at this
time. Read the perl-porters archives for more debate on Perl licensing.
>> The second you put in gmake, gmake requires
>> iconv, readline and all the other nasty libraries, and from that point
>> on if you build something you never know if it's going to link in to
>> one of those libraries.
>> ...
>> This can cause major problems for commercial users.
>>
>
> How? Last I heard, the *L*GPL only requires making the *library*
> source available (and that only if the library has been modified).
> It doesn't extend to the using application.
>
>
>> I'd love for someone to modify the gmake port to have a variable
>> you can set that would build all the GNUified dependency libraries,
>> build and install gmake and statically link in all it's GNUified
>> libraries, then remove all the GNUified libraries.
>>
>
> Or, change all the gnu ports to install into something like
> /usr/local/gnu or /usr/local/gpl instead of straight into
> /usr/local. You'd still have the gnu libs when needed, but
> without having them included in "normal" search paths.
That would seriously muck up a lot of people's assumptions on
locations for programs, and would be incredibly necessary. Plus it would
make searching for programs in $PATH a slight bit more time consuming
(on the order of milliseconds I know, but those milliseconds are the
exact reason why I have to manually profile pkg_install to determine
bottlenecks).
Also, please don't muck up email addresses. It's not cool, by any means.
-Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?468C6224.2090003>