2006/3/1, Michael Thomas <wart@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 04:31:06PM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
> >
> >>Two packages that I recently submitted for review ('rogue' and 'ularn')
> >
> >
> > I was always under the impression rogue (and rogue clone) didn't meet the
> > Fedora licensing requirements as it was non-commercial only
>
> That's true for Angband, but rogue 5.4.2 is very BSD-ish:
>
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/roguelike/rogue5.4/LICENSE.TXT?view=markup
>
> --Mike
>
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>
>
>
id personally suggest to treat gamedaemons like other daemons and
create seperate system users for the game server processes.
A server is a server. Functionality differs but is rather irrelevant
in my eyes regarding the system users for the services.
regards,
Rudolf Kastl
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
