Date: 03 May 2003 03:54:46 +1000 From: Q <q_dolan@yahoo.com.au> To: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@tcoip.com.br> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: bzip2(1) compression for manpages, Groff and Texinfo docs Message-ID: <1051898086.2269.59.camel@boxster.home.net> In-Reply-To: <3EB2AC00.7070307@tcoip.com.br> References: <20030502171957.28624.qmail@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <3EB2AC00.7070307@tcoip.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Correct me if I am wrong, but zlib isn't released under the GPL, so you could switch to using /usr/bin/minigzip instead and it becomes a moot point. Seeya...Q On Sat, 2003-05-03 at 03:33, Daniel C. Sobral wrote: > Thomas Seck wrote: > > * Garrett Wollman (wollman@lcs.mit.edu): > > > > > >>The correct answer for one of these has no implications on any of > >>the others. > > > > > > I am just a user but I'll second that. > > > > Am I the only one who thinks that some people are on a "kill the GNU, > > kill it now, no matter the cost" trip again? > > > > I can see no benefit in switching to bzip2 other than eliminating GPL'ed > > software. No, I do not think disk space is an issue nowadays. > > If two programs do the same thing, but one is GPL and the other is not, > the other one is clearly preferable for FreeBSD. > > As far as _ports_ are concerned, it is irrelevant. As far as the _base_ > system is concerned, the less we depend on GPL, the better. > > The "sole benefit" you see is clearly enough of a benefit. There _are_ > good reasons to reduce dependency on GPL, y'know.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1051898086.2269.59.camel>