Re: [gentoo-dev] how to handle sensitive files when generating binary packages

[Josh Saddler <nightmorph@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1268 bytes --]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 15:19:46 -0500
> Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> I'm not sure that's really a feasible solution (but then you probably
>> weren't suggesting it with that intention). Being able to create a
>> "backup" of any installed package without re-emerging is pretty
>> handy. Many people use it and there would be a revolt if quickpkg
>> were removed.
> 
> Then live-filesystem-generated packages could be marked as 'not for
> redistribution'.
> 

That's probably a good idea if only because there are certain binaries
that we're not allowed to redistribute...things like Firefox with
certain USE flags, or freetype with the better hinter. Neither of these
can be redistributed in binary form with certain USE flags; Firefox will
have to ship without its proper name, and freetype will have to use the
sucky -- er, "magically more free" -- hinter.

@vapier:

Do potential licensing/copyright issues like these factor into your
proposal in any way? wolf31o2 mentioned installing several identical
boxes simultaneously using the same redistributed binaries, but in the
case of these two packages, if they're built with -bindist on the live
filesystem, redistributing it as-is isn't allowed.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]