On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 02:13:12AM +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > If samba4 depends on these files for its build, then we're screwed,
> > aren't we? And we need to move it to non-free...
> I'd like to figure out what approach has been taken with Heimdal in
> Debian (as those problematic files ar
On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 07:02 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Jelmer Vernooij (jel...@debian.org):
> > tags 547280 -fixed-upstream upstream pending
> > thanks
> >
> > Unfortunately heimdal (which Samba 4 includes) extracts data from these
> > RFCs during its build, so we can't just remove
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 07:02:49 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> If samba4 depends on these files for its build, then we're screwed,
> aren't we? And we need to move it to non-free...
>
Well presumably the data from the RFC is not actually under a
restrictive license, otherwise that would kind
Quoting Jelmer Vernooij (jel...@debian.org):
> tags 547280 -fixed-upstream upstream pending
> thanks
>
> Unfortunately heimdal (which Samba 4 includes) extracts data from these
> RFCs during its build, so we can't just remove these RFCs. As upstream
> we don't think it's a problem for RFCs to not
tags 547280 -fixed-upstream upstream pending
thanks
Unfortunately heimdal (which Samba 4 includes) extracts data from these
RFCs during its build, so we can't just remove these RFCs. As upstream
we don't think it's a problem for RFCs to not be modifiable.
Doesn't the Heimdal Debian package have
5 matches
Mail list logo
