Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
From: William Ballard <nospam_40811@alltel.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:29:25 -0500
Message-id: <[🔎] 20041227032925.GA3024@alltel.net>
Mail-followup-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 1104116662.11134.2.camel@localhost>
References: <[🔎] 1104116662.11134.2.camel@localhost>

On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 07:04:22PM -0800, james wrote:
> Why can't lame be packaged in the non-free section?

It's patent-encumbered; all mp3 software is.

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
  - From: Chris Cheney <ccheney@cheney.cx>
- Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
  - From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>

References:
- Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
  - From: james <james@westcoastbmx.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
Next by Date: Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
Previous by thread: Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
Next by thread: Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread