Re: Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- From: al davis <ad20@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:03:27 -0400
On Tuesday 17 June 2008, Steve Lamb wrote:
The program must include source code, and must allow
distribution in source code as well as compiled form.
but there is the "non-free" section, which includes some
closed-source products that are proprietary in every way. I
see license statements like "Use is limited to non-profit
applications or evaluation purposes.". ..... "Make it clear
that this is a Freeware Light edition of a commercial product,
and as such may only be used for non-commercial or evaluation
purposes."
-- crippled demo ...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- From: John Hasler
- Re: Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- References:
- Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- From: Simon Jolle sjolle
- Re: Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- From: consultores
- Re: Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- From: Steve Lamb
- Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- Prev by Date: Re: eth0: no IPv6 router present
- Next by Date: Re: Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- Previous by thread: Re: Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- Next by thread: Re: Portage, RPM or DPKG: number of packaged software comparison
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|