djb utilities

richard at richard at
Fri May 2 10:02:52 PDT 2003

On 2003-05-02 09:25:25 +0000, Larry Lawrence wrote:
> So the question is this.  Are we doing DJB Utilities a disservice by
> relocating all the files just like every other distrobution AND would
> installing these utilities as the author intended harm any of our current
> packages?
DJB states conditions for using his software here:
And there is a separate page for qmail here:

Over simplifying:
*) You can distribute the source, but only exact copies.
*) You can distibute patches, limited only by the requiremnets of the
   patch's author.
*) You can compile and install what you like.
*) You can distribute binaries only if you make a real effort to
   ensure the programs work properly and all the files go in DJB's
   choice of directories.

DJB explains why we should use his choice of directories here:
I think DJB's arguments against broken cross-platform compatibility
apply equally well against his decision to break cross-package

I do not like DJB's choice of directories because they make it
difficult to use mount options like ro and noexec for added protection.
This is why I ignore DJB's choice of layout for systems that I compile.

I think we need a note in the book warning that you cannot distribute
binaries based on an installation without DJB's choice of directories.

If the decision goes for using DJB's layout, then I think someone
is going to have to do a proper job of writing instructions that
create binaries that can be distributed. This will involve adding
a few packages, and keeping current on some mailing lists for
distributors of qmail and related software.

Any volenteers?

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list