Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:02:08 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 187926] New port: devel/liballium - Tor pluggable transports utility library Message-ID: <bug-187926-13-yxcZWnzK9o@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-187926-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-187926-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187926 --- Comment #8 from fk@fabiankeil.de --- Thanks for committing the ports and making the required fixes for 10amd64, Adam. I previously wasn't aware of USES= pathfix and GNU_CONFIGURE= yes, but agree that using them is superior to clowning around with CONFIGURE_ARGS and will use them in the future. I intentionally didn't install the license file as "documentation" because I suspect that some people build all packages without documentation to decrease the package size and assume that this does not affect whether or not the packages can be legally distributed to third parties on their own. There are indeed already lots of ports that have this issue and as far as I know there is no (documented) project policy that prohibits this, but my personal preference is to always include the license in the package (for my ports). I did not actually invent the "central license path" but used the one that is used by the undocumented LICENSE "framework", which is already used by quite a few ports. Anyway, as long as everyone involved is aware of the legal implications of treating the license file as documentation, I can live with it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-187926-13-yxcZWnzK9o>