emil at caucho.com
Thu Aug 7 18:44:57 BST 2008
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 05:52:40PM +0700, Sikon wrote:
> Packages that include binaries are not allowed, even in the multiverse
> repository (which includes things like flashplugin-nonfree that you
> Instead of distributing the actual binaries in the deb file, such
> packages download the binaries from the upstream website. This is a
> standard practice. What you can do is set up, say, a tar.gz file on
> your web server for the installer script to find, download and
Ok, got it. Thanks for outlining the procedure for us. We'll take a
look at some of the other nonfree, installer-type packages as a starting
> However, I don't know about the others, but I'd prefer the GPL version
> to be packaged first. Ubuntu is, after all, first and foremost about
> free software. We use Resin in our company, and I use Ubuntu at my
> workstation, so I'm interested in helping to package Resin for Ubuntu.
I just checked and it looks like we might be able to do a package of
the GPL version as well! :-) One of the technical sticking points
was being able to do setuid() to drop from root after binding to
port 80. This code has been moved to GPL, so it's more justifiable
for us to do a package of the GPL Resin. I'll make updates to the
Launchpad bug as we make progress.
> 2008/8/7 Emil Ong <emil at caucho.com>:
> > Hi MOTU,
> > I'm an engineer at Caucho, which makes the Resin Java application
> > server. We've recently created a .deb package of our server that
> > we'd like to distribute on the Ubuntu repositories. There's an
> > existing needs-packaging bug for Resin on Lauchpad, #105497.
> > There are a couple of hitches, though. We dual-license Resin as GPL
> > and a closed source professional (upsell) version with a bit of extra
> > code for added performance/clustering. We'd like to distribute the
> > latter in the non-free repository (similar to flashplugin-nonfree).
> > At the moment, we don't have a package of the GPL version and I'm
> > not sure whether/when we'll be doing that.
> > Part of the rational is that the professional version just reverts
> > to the open source functionality if it doesn't find a license.
> > Another reason for the Pro package is that it contains some
> > platform-dependent code in C, while the pure GPL version contains
> > only Java; we wanted to remove the need for users to compile that
> > additional code.
> > What is the procedure for submitting something to the nonfree
> > repository? The REVU page (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/REVU)
> > that I saw doesn't seem to address this case, but I'm guessing
> > there's some process because of Flash, et al. Can someone point me
> > in the right direction?
> > If I understand correctly, the flashplugin-nonfree package actually
> > downloads the plugin from Adobe. I should note that our package
> > will include the actual binaries.
> > Thanks,
> > Emil
> > ============================================================
> > Emil Ong
> > Software Engineer
> > Caucho Technology, Inc.
> > mailto:emil at caucho.com
> > http://blog.caucho.com/
> > Caucho: Reliable Open Source
> > --> Resin: application server
> > --> Quercus: PHP in Java
> > --> Hessian Web Services
> > --
> > Ubuntu-motu mailing list
> > Ubuntu-motu at lists.ubuntu.com
> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Caucho Technology, Inc.
Tel. (858) 361-2436
mailto:emil at caucho.com
Caucho: Reliable Open Source
--> Resin: application server
--> Quercus: PHP in Java
--> Hessian Web Services
More information about the Ubuntu-motu