Fedora/RH policies sometimes suck

[Anne Wilson]

On Tuesday 10 April 2007 05:31, Ed Greshko wrote:
> linuxmaillists at charter.net wrote:
>
> > I just want to know what other
> > packages are on the Fedora distro that are are missing
> > original functionality simply because of legal issues.
>
> And that would help how?  Yes, you'd know what you're missing...but you
> already know you're missing "something" so why not install the OpenOffice
> rpms and be assured of missing nothing.
>
No-one is answering the question.  Forget the OpenOffice fixation.  The 
question is 'How do we know which of Fedora's packages have been altered in 
this way?'  OpenOffice would be one, but there are others.  Totem comes to 
mind, and I'd guess that there are lots more.  As Les remarked, it could be 
indicated in the package name.

As for how it would help, we could then decide for ourselves whether we need 
to go to the source and build our own packages.

Anne
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20070410/b1aa9d34/attachment-0001.sig>