On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 08:08:04PM -0400, Ken Mankoff wrote:
:
: On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Eugene wrote:
: >
: >On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 03:23:45PM -0400, Ken Mankoff wrote:
: >>
: >> I am distributing a program that relies on some X11 libraries.
: >> We assume the people installing this do not have, nor want, X11
: >> installed. They say its a liability to provide shell access, and
: >> they remove Terminal also.
: >
: >If your app needs X11 support, so be it. Forget the whole
: >liability mumbo jumbo. If people like your app and want to run
: >it, they will install X11 and learn and love it.
: >
: >Your other alternative is to re-write the X11 pieces and go
: >completely with Cocoa calls.
:
: My take is: if they won't install X11, so be it. Isn't there no
: liability if I compile my own libraries and distribute them? I think
: that might be a better work-around than re-writing code, given the
: situation.
I just remembered another potential solution. Ask the XDarwin folks if
you can re-distribute their X Windows binaries.
<http://www.xdarwin.org/>
Looking at their licence, you might be okay.
<http://www.xdarwin.org/about/>
--
Eugene Lee
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/x11-users/email@hidden
This email sent to email@hidden
