Re: non-free package archive
On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 09:12:45AM +0200, Kaare Hviid wrote:
> I found it unclear if distributing it in a .deb was allowed, as it
> could be seen as of a form of modification beyond unzipping of
> compressed files. As such, I also marked it with a "?", denoting that I
> couldn't tell if it was "good" or "bad". Given nVidia's presence in the
> Linux desktop market, I'd be surprised if they wouldn't *promote*
> distribution of ready-to-go driver packages for the Debian amd64 sarge
> port. Didn't they even sponsor Gentoo with amd64 hardware to get going?
My reading of the nvidia copyright/README seemed to explicitly state
repackaging the files was allowed (seemed almost encouraged). Changing
the binaries is not (although why would you want to), where binaries are
the .o files inside that are used as part of the linking.
> I certainly agree - the number of consumer desktops with the amd64
> nVidia combination is staggering to the brink of almost becoming
> synonymous in the consumer electronics shops.
Well ATI and nVidia seem to be fighting over who gets the bigger part of
what intel doesn't own with their integrated video.
Len Sorensen
Reply to: