[Dev] Question about libre packaging requirements (apache-ant binaries)

[Nicolás Reynolds]

On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:55:49 -0500, Luke T.Shumaker <lukeshu at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> The package apache-ant is libre. However, it is *not* built by the
> PKGBUILD; since all the binaries are Java, and platform-independant,
> the PKGBUILD just grabs the precompiled binaries from the ant site.
> 
> From my understanding, we don't allow this. (And maybe neither does
> Arch?)
> 
> So:
>  1. Is this allowed in Arch, should we report it upstream?
>  2. If it is allowed in Arch, is it worth us fixing it, or do we just
>     let it slide?
>  3. If we do let it slide, do we hold our own packages to the
>     "build-from-source" requirement, in cases of platform-independant
>     packages?
> 
> From a progmatic standpoint, bundling up Google's binary of
> closure-compiler would make my life easier.
> 
> However, even in these cases (Java), we risk programs inadvertantly
> being non-compilable with a free compiler. For example, guava, a
> "statically linked" (or the Java equivalent) dependany of
> closure-compiler trips the OpenJDK6 javac's bug 100167

this is important, also for hosting sources. can you come up with a
build from source PKGBUILD for it? i think we should push this upstream
soon. are there more packages built like this? D:

> 
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100167
> 
> In this case the patch is trivial (and in Debian), but I vaguely
> recall finding another case tripping the same bug sometime in the last
> week, but can't recall.
> 
> ~ Luke Shumaker
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabolagnulinux.org
> http://lists.parabolagnulinux.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 489 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20120208/baf4fa9f/attachment.sig>