tech-pkg archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Options vs. Binary packages

David Brownlee <> writes:

>       We could have a variation on PKG_SUGGESTED_OPTIONS which if
>       present is guaranteed to produce a binary package without
>       redistribution restrictions, and have the bulk build system
>       use that and automatically add a note to the includes MESSAGE
>       that certain options are missing in this build

We could, but I would be happier making the default build ok, and
letting people turn things on.  It seems best if what a user types with
a default install matches the binary packages on the ftp server.

Maybe a meta-option "allow-nonfree-dependencies" could default to off,
and if set, then packages would add them to PKG_SUGGESTED_OPTIONS.  That
would people express that they want to tend towards fully functional and
nonfree, but not lose the defaults-matches-binaries property.

Maybe 'meta-option' is needless complexity and this should just be a

Perhaps we should first take a pass at what the problems are.  I suspect
mplayer is one of the more significant cases.

As for gnome, I really don't understand why the gnome folks recommend
anything non-free to start with.

Attachment: pgpA5PwwUkLRO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index