Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 12:48:55 -0400 (AST) From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> To: Randall Hopper <aa8vb@ipass.net> Cc: Alex <ak@freenet.co.uk>, Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>, Russell Cattelan <cattelan@thebarn.com>, Seigo Tanimura <tanimura@r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp>, freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Creative seems to open up SB Live Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9911051246170.2296-100000@thelab.hub.org> In-Reply-To: <19991104182649.A2726@ipass.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Randall Hopper wrote:
> AFAIK "port" is not an option, "re-engineer" is (from your no-GPL
> perspective at least). We want to keep this kosher.
Odd question here, but, with the modules system we currently have,
*shouldn't* it be relatively easy to create a "port" (ie. in
/usr/ports/??) that installs the module, even if it is GPL'd? Why do (if
they do?) a new modules seem to imply adding to the base source tree, vs
creating some sort of /usr/ports/modules system?
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-multimedia" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9911051246170.2296-100000>