| |||||||||||||
Preferred formPreferred formPosted Mar 6, 2011 0:53 UTC (Sun) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)In reply to: Preferred form by pboddie Parent article: Commitment to Open (Red Hat News)
That is quite different. An SRPM contains the upstream, unmodified source; (optionally) some patches against the above; a set of instructions on how to create and build the binaries from the preceding; and some ancilliary stuff. So there isn't any question of "distributing patches without original source". You might argue SRPMs fail the GPL because they don't give you the modified sources... ;-)
(Log in to post comments)
Preferred form Posted Mar 7, 2011 17:07 UTC (Mon) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
I don't want to mention any names, but I wasn't talking about SRPMs exclusively, although this is obviously Red Hat's preferred mechanism for distribution. Nevertheless, you make a good point: Debian source packaging is done with upstream archives, patch archives, and some stuff which lets you combine them. I imagine that the GPL permits such distribution practices because all the different parts come from the same place and involve widely-available technologies for putting everything together.
|
|||||||||||||