On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 10:15:04PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> Ok, we should probably find a different word to describe this
> relationship.
>
> Perhaps it could be phrased that ndiswrapper has a need for the presence
> of some software which is not available in debian main.
But it doesn't -- ndiswrapper will sit there quite beningly if the non-free
driver isn't present. It'll do everything it's supposed to -- link with the
kernel and provide an ABI for other software -- without any errors.
The drivers, on the other hand won't function without ndiswrapper (or Windows).
Similarly, if we could package the windows driver, we would write:
Package: videoXYZ-driver
Section: non-free/drivers
Depends: ndiswrapper
not
Package: ndiswrapper
Depends: videoXYZ-driver | video123-driver | videoBLAH-driver
We already do the relationships this way for USB drivers that access
the USB ports via libusb, eg, which are all packaged and in main so skip
the complications ndiswrapper raises.
Basically, I think it's right to say that the user has a need for the
driver, and the driver has a need for ndiswrapper. It's only because
of the user's need for a driver that anything non-free is involved;
ndiswrapper itself is quite happy without one (or with one of the toy
free ones).
For comparison, installer packages normally have a need for the non-free
software: if they don't have it, they can't install it in the first place.
(And thanks, I do think "has a need" is a helpful way of describing this)
Cheers,
aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature