Ubuntu from source

[Derek Broughton]

Rashkae wrote:

> 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.

No, they're not - and Florian even posted the relevant excerpt from the GPL.  
So no, I haven't missed the point.
-- 
derek