From owner-freebsd-ports  Wed Nov 27 14:44:31 1996
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA18662
          for ports-outgoing; Wed, 27 Nov 1996 14:44:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vader.cs.berkeley.edu (vader.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.38.234])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA18642
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Wed, 27 Nov 1996 14:44:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by vader.cs.berkeley.edu (8.8.3/8.7.3) id OAA15681; Wed, 27 Nov 1996 14:44:20 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 14:44:20 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199611272244.OAA15681@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>
To: erich@lodgenet.com
CC: ports@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <199611271514.JAA18297@jake.lodgenet.com> (erich@lodgenet.com)
Subject: Re: Linux Wingz...
From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * I built a port of Linux Wingz, but before I commit it I'd like
 * a couple of opinions on the license.  It's distributed as `shareware'.
 * Here's the questionable clip from the license file:
 * 
 *   Wingz 1.4.2 is a "shareware program" and is provided at no charge
 *   to the user for evaluation. Feel free to share it with your
 *   friends, but do not give it away altered or as part of another
 *   system.  If you find this program useful and find that you are
 *   using Wingz 1.4.2 and continue to use Wingz 1.4.2 after a
 *   45 day trial period, you must make a registration payment to IISC.
 * 
 * 
 * Is a freebsd-port considered `altered' or part of another system?
 * should it set NO_CDROM?

It would be `altered' if there is a patch, but since this is a Linux
program, I assume it's a binary port, right?

And about being `part of another system' ... I don't think having
distfiles/packages on the CD qualifies for that, unless it's included
in a linuxdist or something intermixed with other ports.  Besides, I
think it only helps him to have it more widely available via a FreeBSD 
CD-ROM.

However, to honor his interest, I would do the following:

(1) Create a pkg/INSTALL to print out the license file

(2) Call it from post-install: so it will also be read by non-package users

Satoshi