Re: Ubuntu from source

Derek Broughton wrote:

Once again, you're telling me I'm wrong by agreeing with what I said.
Ubuntu is _not_ a commercial distribution, and could (but doesn't) simply
redistribute binary packages, per section 3C, and point users to the source
from which they got _their_ package (ie, the "offer" they received).

Sure, it's legalese, but it's really _simple_ legalese and shouldn't be that
hard to understand.

Again, you miss the point.. Canonical can not simply point to an
upstream source for the the source and say "here, get the source from
these guys." Canonical is obliged to provide the source *themselves.*,
and so is anyone redistributing a Ubuntu Binary package.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Ubuntu from source
    ... Ubuntu is _not_ a commercial distribution, ... redistribute binary packages, per section 3C, and point users to the source ... Sure, it's legalese, but it's really _simple_ legalese and shouldn't be that ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: Ubuntu from source
    ... Ubuntu is _not_ a commercial distribution, ... redistribute binary packages, per section 3C, and point users to the ... Sure, it's legalese, but it's really _simple_ legalese and shouldn't be ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: Is there any modern distribution providing kde3?
    ... http://www.trinitydesktop.org/ Has binary packages for Debian, Ubuntu & ... Slackware. ...
    (comp.windows.x.kde)