Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:43:23 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> To: Garrett Cooper <youshi10@u.washington.edu> Cc: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@math.missouri.edu>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: augmenting a port: request for advice Message-ID: <475D427B.40000@icyb.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <B16E66A6-EE5B-4475-8D03-CD5EBB48D7A2@u.washington.edu> References: <47594FAB.8050804@icyb.net.ua> <47596C80.8030905@icyb.net.ua> <47596EE1.3070606@math.missouri.edu> <B16E66A6-EE5B-4475-8D03-CD5EBB48D7A2@u.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 08/12/2007 01:52 Garrett Cooper said the following: > On Dec 7, 2007, at 8:03 AM, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: >> Here is an idea. I notice that the extra sources you want to >> download are rather small (about 7000 bytes when zipped). How >> about if you put the sources into the "files" subdirectory of the >> port itself, and then the port doesn't have to download anything >> extra. >> >> So, for example, the portlint port comes complete with full >> sources, adding up to nearly 100,000 bytes in its "files" >> subdirectory. So adding 7000 bytes to a port is going to be small >> by comparison. > > > No dice on that I think. It's artistic license, which means (AFAIK) > that it can't be distributed with the ports tree as it's not BSD > licensed code. Well, actually the file in question in by me and is under 3-clause BSD license. But I am a little bit reluctant to 'pollute' ports tree with C sources that don't have to be there. It's only from philosophical point of view, no technical reasons. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?475D427B.40000>