PUPS Volunteers list

[Steven M. Schultz]

> From: allisonp at world.std.com (Allison J Parent)
> Query:
> 
> The license is more concerned with source level code.  What about those of 
> us that are interested in binaries only configured for a working system?

	If you don't plan on staying current with parts that change then
	a binary only system might work.  I can't see myself volunteering
	to build binaries (especially kernels) for varying configurations.

	The older, 'static' or frozen (for now), distributions can be run
	binary only - but the traditional method of updating systems was
	to either distribute diffs  or replacement source modules.  

	One main reason for this, especially in the kernel (but also some
	applications level stuff), is that the address space of a PDP-11 does
	not allow the luxury of including all ways of doing something.  For
	example:  the C library has to be build for either 'hosts' file or
	resolver routines - can't do both.  So someone's running a binary
	only release but with a hosts file orientation.  THey want updated
	binaries but all my systems are resolver based - building new binaries
	would be painful and time consuming.  What happens when a system 
	include file changes and all (or many) of the binaries in the system
	are affected - who's going to volunteer to recompile the system and
	make a new CD for the folks who don't want to maintain current sources?

	In the kernel arena it's even worse - who ever builds a kernel would 
	have to request a 'config' file (do you want 'quotas' or not, do you
	want 'networking' and if so which ethernet card, do you want 1 or 2 
	MSCP controllers, and so on.  Ick.) and custom build a kernel (can't 
	include _all_ possible devices, etc because it just won't fit).  I 
	don't know about any one else but I'd rather not get into the 
	providing custom kernels and binaries.

	From V5 on (I can't speak for earlier) you were expected to have a
	source license (which thanks to SCO's help we now will have) and
	install/maintain the system from those.  Binary only setups were
	extremely uncommon (except in shops with lots of machines and they'd
	have a single 'master' source system and build and distribute from 
	that).  

	Configurability is very limited without sources and I'd have thought
	that everyone would be dancing with joy at being freed from binary
	only releases.

	As has been mentioned before there are binary only V6, V7, and V5
	images already available without requiring a source license at all.
	There's no need to pay the minimal $100 for the upcoming license if
	all that's desired is a binary only system that's preconfigured for
	a limited set of devices.  (re)configuration takes sources. 

	So I guess the question is who's volunteering to build and distribute
	the binary only kits?  Not me ;-)

	Steven Schultz


Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA10998
	for pups-liszt; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 16:37:18 +1100 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f