On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 mcmahill@mtl.mit.edu wrote:

> Do we have any way of handling binary packages which may or may not use
> kerberos?  Ie, something like:
> 
> make KERBEROS=4 package
> 
> to produce
>   foo-1.0-us.tgz
> 
> or
> 
> make package
> 
> to produce
> 
>   foo-1.0-export.tgz

We should!

I've given this some thought lately, and I favor the idea of changing
the package name conditionally on some contentious (export restricted
or patented) feature, as you propose, but I'm leaning toward
foo-1.0.tgz/foo-crypto-us-1.0.tgz/foo-crypto-intl-1.0.tgz. The
identifier is to be tagged onto PKGNAME, as if it they were all
different packages, although they may or may not have seperate
directories in pkgsrc (to be decided on a case-by-case basis).

The -us/-intl should depend on the setting of USA_RESIDENT. This is
important, because you could have two packages that are _BINARY_
_IDENTICAL_, and therefore indistinguishable, one treasonous to
export, the other freely available anywhere in the world, depending
only on where it was made. [It's infuriating that U. S. courts rarely
recognize the common law prohibition against laws that don't make
sense.] Even if TNF doesn't want to distribute such packages, someone
else might, and we'd be doing those people a favor if we make it
possible to comply with the law while doing so.