From owner-cvs-user  Mon Mar 13 20:31:00 1995
Return-Path: cvs-user-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id UAA12152 for cvs-user-outgoing; Mon, 13 Mar 1995 20:31:00 -0800
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA12103; Mon, 13 Mar 1995 20:30:45 -0800
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id OAA10154; Tue, 14 Mar 1995 14:27:47 +1000
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 14:27:47 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199503140427.OAA10154@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: nate@trout.sri.MT.net, phk@ref.tfs.com
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/release/compat20 libgcc.so.261.0.uu
Cc: CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-user@freefall.cdrom.com
Sender: cvs-user-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

>> I doubt the GNU people would be that anal retentive, since we already
>> published the sources for the 2.0-RELEASE on the net...

>Uhh, you are wrong about that one.  They are *very* anal and retentive
>about it since they want *everyone* to be able to get the exact source
>that created the binaries.  The Minix folks find this out when Bruce
>made the 1.X binaries available for minix-386 and the archive sites only
>kept the binaries and the diffs.  The GNU folks said they were required

I've never made gnu binaries available for anything.

>to keep the sources online as well even though the sources could be gotten
>from other sites.  The reasoning was the other sites would delete the
>old sources when the new versions came on line (similar to us deleting 2.0
>when 2.1 comes on line).

This restriction seems to have been relaxed for linux.  It would take
an archaelogical expedition to find complete sources for everything.

Bruce