Re: ndiswrapper
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 11:17:14AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes ("Re: ndiswrapper"):
> > Written as "free software A does not depend on any non-free software and
> > free software C depends on A", I'm inclined to believe that this *is*
> > sufficient reason to not exclude A from main.
> I agree. But C has to be a real piece of software that people
> actually use, not some entity constructed to win arguments about
> licences. Here `depend on' means `requires to use (in this way)'
> rather than Depends:.
In order to claim this as a reason for not excluding the package from main,
yes, absolutely. That doesn't mean the converse is true, though, so we
still need to refine further to decide which side of the line ndiswrapper
belongs on -- so far we only have two tests which don't apply to
ndiswrapper. :)
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: