Old kernel RPMS
Paul Iadonisi
pri.rhl3 at iadonisi.to
Sun Mar 13 23:29:58 UTC 2005
On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 18:06 -0500, Sean wrote:
> On Sun, March 13, 2005 1:59 pm, Paul Iadonisi said:
>
> I'm afraid I have to agree with Jeff here, Paul.<g>
Well...I don't! So there! ;-)
> No, you're only required to provide 3 year availability if you neglect to
> distribute source code along with object code in the first place. Notice
> that section 3b of the GPLv2 is not enforced if distribution is carried
> out in accordance with section 3a.
Ah. I'll have to take a closer look at that. Makes sense, though.
It *seemed* to me that Red Hat was in compliance, but it's not like I
read the GPL that often, so I was recalling the part about making it
available for three years, but not the other relevant parts. Who would
read it often? Like any license, it's written in drab legalese.
> Anyone who sees a need for this service could provide it for themselves or
> for others.
There was at least one mirror that had two or three (or more) revs
back, but for the life of me I can't remember which one, and haven't
been able to find it again.
> But developers probably have less of a need for this than
> testers do.
Possibly. I suppose developers can always use cvs to get what they
need. But that still leaves out the problem of older official updates
to releases disappearing. I'll see if I can find that mirror that kept
multiple revs of rpms in rawhide...maybe it also had multiple revs back
in the updates as well.
--
-Paul Iadonisi
Senior System Administrator
Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux.
GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list