Ubuntu from source

[Rashkae]

Derek Broughton wrote:
>
> Once again, you're telling me I'm wrong by agreeing with what I said.  
> Ubuntu is _not_ a commercial distribution, and could (but doesn't) simply 
> redistribute binary packages, per section 3C, and point users to the source 
> from which they got _their_ package (ie, the "offer" they received).
> 
> Sure, it's legalese, but it's really _simple_ legalese and shouldn't be that 
> hard to understand.

Again, you miss the point.. Canonical can not simply point to an
upstream source for the the source and say "here, get the source from
these guys."  Canonical is obliged to provide the source *themselves.*,
and so is anyone redistributing a Ubuntu Binary package.