From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-41363-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1OPOOy-0005hs-Cz
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:21:40 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6D1A4E0CC4;
Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:21:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C66DBE08D9
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:21:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from shanghai.localnet (p5B215B5A.dip.t-dialin.net [91.33.91.90])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43A241B401E
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:21:12 +0000 (UTC)
From: Lars Wendler <polynomial-c@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding AdobeFlash-10{,.1} licenses to EULA group
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 01:20:59 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.32.15; KDE/4.4.4; x86_64; ; )
References: <4C169D32.5080706@gentoo.org> <4C1A9E38.8050206@gmail.com> <4C1AA3A9.2040204@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C1AA3A9.2040204@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
boundary="nextPart3752426.kgqqhhYDz0";
protocol="application/pgp-signature";
micalg=pgp-sha1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201006180121.08389.polynomial-c@gentoo.org>
X-Archives-Salt: cfcf621e-af4b-43aa-b33e-bd4c7c1eb6df
X-Archives-Hash: 5e78287641218a89decd578e4c09ace1
--nextPart3752426.kgqqhhYDz0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Am Freitag 18 Juni 2010, 00:37:29 schrieb Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy=
=E1=BB=85n:
> Dale schrieb:
> >>>>> One notable section is 7.6 in which Adobe reserves the right to
> >>>>> download and install additional Content Protection software on the
> >>>>> user's PC.
> >>>>=20
> >>>> Not like anyone will actually *read* the license before adding it to
> >>>> their accept group, but if they did this would indeed be an important
> >>>> thing of which users should be aware.
> >>>=20
> >>> I defend it is our job to warn users about this kind of details. To me
> >>> it sounds that a einfo at post-build phase would do the job, what do
> >>> you
> >>> guys think?
>=20
> Though I am not opposed to adding a warning, I think the license mask is
> sufficient. If users demonstrate their indifference by setting
> ACCEPT_LICENSE=3D"*" or adding AdobeFlash-10.1 without reading the
> license, then I somehow doubt that elog messages will have an effect.
Maybe I'm quite alone with that but I have ACCEPT_LICENSE=3D"*" because I h=
ate=20
to edit my make.conf each time I try to emerge a package with yet another=20
license that is missing in the variable. But I still watch for elog message=
s=20
carefully after each merge.
=20
> >> Definitely yes! This is a very dangerous snippet in Adobe's license
> >> which
> >> should be pretty clearly pointed at to every user.
> >=20
> > Could that also include a alternative to adobe? If there is one.
>=20
> There are three open-source flash browser plugins in portage:
> - swfdec: development seems to have stalled
> - gnash: I have received mixed reports about the stability of the
> current version. The next release will include VA-API support and other
> improvements.
> - lightspark: a recent effort which is in its early stages and still
> incomplete in many ways (eg. audio support is planned for 0.4.2)
>=20
> None of them I consider good enough to replace adobe-flash for the
> average user.
Unfortunately yes. Especially now that Adobe fails to provide x86_64 users =
a=20
non-vulnerable plugin I'd very much prefer to use an open-source replacemen=
t=20
that for sure would be fixed much faster in case it's affected by some secu=
rity=20
vulnerability as well.
One can only hope that flash finally vanishes from WWW now that HTML5 could=
=20
become a good alternative...
> Regards,
> Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy=E1=BB=85n
=2D-=20
Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C)
Gentoo developer and bug-wrangler
--nextPart3752426.kgqqhhYDz0
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEABECAAYFAkwareQACgkQ9pZ0q5gcpvzpJgCghQH1M71TL5zrXW2DhSiUk52K
fYsAnRNRs6+a5RmZEcH1o4Fkh5wAGFpt
=jAHh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart3752426.kgqqhhYDz0--