Subject: Re: [Frank da Cruz : Re: Kermit and
To: Frank da Cruz <email@example.com>
From: Hubert Feyrer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/23/1999 16:51:40
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Frank da Cruz wrote:
> I think one solution might be that each "free Unix" "product", like
> NetBSD, creates a C-Kermit install package in its own native format (RPM
> or whatever), and this platform-specific install package is allowed to go
> on the FTP sites and free software CDROMs, since it is, after all, the
> same package that goes out with the base product (NetBSD in this case).
Er, kermit is not part of base NetBSD. Right now, it's "only" one of many
programs that can be shaped into a "platform-specific install package"
with our build system. This shaping can be done by everyone, not limited
to "us" NetBSD developers as "we" may not have access to a specific
hardware platform or OS version that the binary is needed for.
(What we have right now is something like a RPM "spec" file, if that helps
to make things clear. No SRPM, we don't distribute the source!).
> The key phrases here are "free Unix" (as opposed to Solaris, HP-UX, AIX,
> etc) and "platform-specific package" (as opposed to the general-purpose
- we can put up compiled binaries of kermit
- we can NOT put up source for people's convenience
- compiled binaries can be distributed on "our" official CDs
- compiled binaries can be distributed on NetBSD CDs made by
3rd parties, given that the primary goal of that is to distribute
kermit only as one of may pieces of software, not an integral part
of that CD.
That's what I understand so far. Is this correct?
- can anyone else put up compiled binaries of kermit, e.g. because
noone else can generate these binaries for this certain OS version
or hardware platform (think of new platforms NetBSD is ported to)
(really, we don't have means & matters to prevent this, but I'd just
like to know...)
NetBSD - Better for your uptime than Viagra