An idea for RPM -> License Agreement support

Hikaru Amano kagesenshi.87 at
Wed May 30 13:46:26 UTC 2007

On 5/30/07, Chris Brown <snecklifter at> wrote:
> I doubt the reason Sun Java supplies their installer as an executable binary
> is so that the license is read and agreed to. All packages are subject to

yes it is .. after you select agree .. there'll be an RPM in the
current folder .. and you can install it as usual using rpm -i ..
(though the bin file automically done it for you)

> license review before inclusion into Fedora and as you agree/acknowledge
> that Fedora is provided as a distribution under the GPLv2 at install time I
> think license issues are covered - Red Hat legal can comment better however.
> If the real reason for your query is so we can offload "issues" such as the
> usual forbidden item stuff to the user then you are maybe missing the point.
> Fedora doesn't ship software with restrictive licenses, period. The reasons
> for this have been covered before ad infinitum and ad nauseum.

I dont mean its for the official Fedora repos ... Fedora 100%
dedicated to Free software and I love that .. This idea is more for
3rd party sotwares .. like games etc ... by having license agreement
support , i believe it will encourage them to package in RPM instead
of in some installer that only does extraction of files ..

about auto update ... if the package already installed .. just skip
license agreement ..

Mohd Izhar Firdaus Bin Ismail
Amano Hikaru
天野晃 「あまの ひかる」
mohd.izhar.firdaus at
kagesenshi.87 at

More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list