Re: mass bug filing for unmet dependencies
> > On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 08:27:47PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> > > Regardless of whether "works" and "components" mean the same as
> > > "software," a computer's BIOS is a work, component and software.
> > > Commercial IM and Microsoft Exchange servers are works and software
> > > (and a component, but not clearly a component of the Debian system).
> > > Packages in Debian clearly require those to function. Why not move
> > > those dependent packages into contrib?
> Raul Miller writes:
> > The bios dependency would affect every package in Debian, which would
> > conflict with the part of the social contract which specifies "main".
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 10:10:47PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Conflict in what way? It says "contrib" and "non-free" are for works
> that do not conform to the DFSG. Packages in "contrib" conform to the
> DFSG but depend on software that does not. If I interpret the SC's
> statement about "contrib" and "non-free" so it agrees with Policy, I
> see no conflict. Boot loaders currently in "main" conform to the DFSG
> but depend on a BIOS, and there is no free BIOS in "main."
You can't build those boot loaders on a system which hasn't been booted.
If those boot loaders can be in main, then everything else that's in
main can be in main.