[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main



On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main"):
> > What's so different between my own non-free program and my own non-free
> > card which requires a non-free driver to work with ?
> 
> You didn't make the card.

What relevance does it have ?

If I compile the program and thus need the library, it's because I want to
be able to use it. (And I can compile a non-free program that I didn't make)

In both case, the goal of the user is to use something. You were speaking
of relevance of the finality.

> > And we need ndiswrapper because our users can't completely control the
> > drivers that come with the hardware they have received or been given.
> 
> This is an absurd argument.  

Sorry, I don't see why. It's the same kind of constraint for our users.

> In particular, it would suggest that any non-free device driver should
> be allowed.

Yes, our social contract suggest to use non-free for that. However since
ndiswrapper is DFSG-free we don't need to put it there.

Contrib really ought to be used only when the package "depends" (in the
sense of the control field) on something non-free (or should depend on it
if the thing would have been packaged) or for the few installation
wrappers that we have like:
- f-prot-installer
- quake2-data
- msttcorefonts
- flashplugin-nonfree

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/



Reply to: