Re: Mtr prob request

Janne Johansson <icepic.dz@gmail.com> wrote:
> Really simple actually, www.openbsd.org/goals.html , point #2
>
> * "Integrate good code from any source with acceptable licenses... the GPL is not acceptable
> when adding new code"
> and the mtr ports Makefile:
> https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/net/mtr/Makefile?annotate=1.75
> line 10 or so,
> # GPLv2+
>
> So this is why it would not be considered, even if someone wanted it in base.
>
> It is not a goal in itself to move stuff from ports to base.

Thanks for the extended explanation too.

This remind me two important stuff. The first is to not trust 100% software just because is
the ports/packages and this should be enough worrisome. Second do not accept 3rd party
requests to install packages that could compromise your system although source of requests
appears "100%" clean.




-- Daniele Bonini

Feb 28, 2023 08:24:19 Janne Johansson <icepic.dz@gmail.com>:

> Den mån 27 feb. 2023 kl 16:22 skrev Daniele B. <my25mb@aol.com>:
>> Janne Johansson <icepic.dz@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> It has been in ports/packages since 1999, it will stay there.
>>
>> Ok, thanks for the update.
>
> Really simple actually, www.openbsd.org/goals.html , point #2
>
> * "Integrate good code from any source with acceptable licenses. ISC
> or Berkeley style licences are preferred, the GPL is not acceptable
> when adding new code"
> (where "any source" doesn't mean "take any random program you find"
> but rather "do not place external values on the source of a program we
> decided we want to integrate")
>
> and the mtr ports Makefile:
> https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/net/mtr/Makefile?annotate=1.75
> line 10 or so,
> # GPLv2+
>
> So this is why it would not be considered, even if someone wanted it in base.
>
> It is not a goal in itself to move stuff from ports to base.
>
> --
> May the most significant bit of your life be positive.