Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 16:18:02 +1030 (CST) From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: nate@sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, nate@sri.MT.net, Hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unzip for package tools (was re: FBSD 2.1) Message-ID: <199601290548.QAA09561@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <199601290532.WAA07213@rocky.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Jan 28, 96 10:32:34 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nate Williams stands accused of saying: > > Obviously, this breaks down for things development tools (gcc and > friends) and other parts of the system, but those aren't necessary to > build a running system for the most part. (Actually, ld.so is both > GPL'd and necessary which is too bad unless you want to build a static > only system). Not to be rude, but I can't see the "problem scenario" being at all realistic. We have a vendor who will take FreeBSD, remove the networking support, remove the C compiler from their distribution, rebuild everything static, hunt down and dike out everything else even vaguely GPLish, and not rework their installation tools? > Again, it's not a super-critical problem, but it's also not the best of > solutions either. It's a lot better than the current situation, which depends, amusingly enough, on the GPL'd tar and gzip. What is the current state of play on the Zip API anyway? > Nate -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] "wherever you go, there you are" - Buckaroo Banzai [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199601290548.QAA09561>