From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jul  3 09:01:07 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5D1DF37B404; Thu,  3 Jul 2003 09:01:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tophnet.net (tophnet.net [64.81.97.41])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 3F22C43FCB; Thu,  3 Jul 2003 09:01:03 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from chris@tophnet.net)
Received: from tophnet.net (chris@tophnet.net [64.81.97.41])
	by tophnet.net (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h63G11vP046006;
	Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:01:02 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from chris@tophnet.net)
From: Christopher Rosado <chris@tophnet.net>
To: Trevor Johnson <trevor@jpj.net>, ports@freebsd.org
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:01:00 -0600
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9
References: <20030703070806.L43330@blues.jpj.net>
In-Reply-To: <20030703070806.L43330@blues.jpj.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200307031001.00915.chris@tophnet.net>
cc: perky@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: licencing problem with linux_base ports?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 16:01:07 -0000

On Thursday 03 July 2003 05:19 am, Trevor Johnson wrote:

> The distfiles for these are pre-compiled binaries, some of which are
> licenced under the GNU GPL.  The license says we need to do one of:

	[snip]

> AFAIK we do none of these.  The first solutions that come to mind are to
> mark these ports RESTRICTED or to arrange for the SRPM files (or their
> contents) to be packaged along with the binaries (perhaps with a knob to
> disable their packaging).  Neither of these seems very appealing.

Why?  The linux_base ports fetch the relevant RPMs from Redhat mirrors, not 
FreeBSD servers, AFAICT.

A reading of the Makefiles for linux_base and linux_base-6 shows that the 
ports use $MASTER_SITE_REDHAT_LINUX, which according to 
/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.sites.mk is a set of Redhat mirrors.

There's no violation of the GPL here by the ports tree, as it merely downloads 
the files needed by the linuxulator rather than distributing them.

-- 
Christopher Rosado