Re: Request for build: mpg123.
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 05:58:59PM +0100, Lo'oRiS il Kabukimono wrote:
> > > AFAIK mpg321 is free...
> >
> > Yes, but mpg123 isn't.
>
> i mean: since there is mpg321 - that is free - why do you need mpg123 ?
Since there is BSD, that is free, why do you need linux?
Thats not the problem, the problem is the maintainer of this package wants
it to move from unstable to testing and eventually to woody (even though its
in non-free). For this to happen the package has to be built on all
architectures where it is supposed to work. And since it has been built for
arm and m68k before, a new version has to be rebuilt, otherwise it will not
be installed in unstable, since the tools think the package is buggy.
Actually it is "buggy" because of its license. But it seems we don't have a
volunteer anymore who builds non-free and contrib packages by-hand. It
should not be hard to find out which packages need to be recompiled, but I
can fully understand that none of the m68k-maintainers wants to "waste" his
time on this. I did not notice any big impact when I stopped building those
packages. Now this has changed with the pools, but if there is no volunteer
and the maintainers don't build the packages themselves for all arches,
maybe we get rid of non-free by design...
Christian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: