Re: sylpheed{,-claws} packages [was] License question: mod_throttle

[Jeff Bachtel <jeff@cepheid.org>]

> > > Sylpheed's license is 100% determined to GPL2.
> > > And without verifying i'm sure some other ports have their license
> > > determined.
> > > I'm curious about how you get this list.
> > 
> > find /usr/ports -name Makefile | grep PERMIT | grep -vi Yes | \
> > sed 's:/Makefile.*::' | sort | uniq, basically.
> > 
> > In this case, it appears if you build the compface flavor of sylpheed,
> > it cannot be packaged. And that is a bit of the point, lots of ports
> > only become unpackageable under specific FLAVORs.
> 
> There's no OpenBSD package for sylpheed or sylpheed-claws with compface
> flavor.
> 
>      SUBDIR += sylpheed
>      SUBDIR += sylpheed,gpgme
>      SUBDIR += sylpheed-claws
>      SUBDIR += sylpheed-claws,gpgme
>      SUBDIR += sylpheed-claws,pixbuf
>      SUBDIR += sylpheed-claws,gpgme,pixbuf
> 
> but yes, you can build __your own__ sylpheed{,-claws} packages with
> compface.

Yes, Jim, I'm quite aware of that. But Theo wishes to get rid of
unpackageable ports (and presumably flavors), so really mail/faces
should get pulled from the ports tree, as should the compfaces flavor
of sylpheed.

jeff

-- 
Jeff Bachtel  (root@ISC,TAMU)    http://www.cepheid.org/~jeff
				 [finger jeff@cepheid.org for PGP key]