Re: non-free?
- To: Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org>
- Cc: debian-curiosa@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: non-free?
- From: Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@gwolf.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:05:07 -0600
- Message-id: <20140325020507.GE32222@gwolf.org>
- In-reply-to: <CAKTje6HDEHSruC=FpBQTPv6+Z7EuzuJeHuk_1rFN7rVQ3uTX_Q@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAKTje6FR1_jDMWtKDjiq8KfnCJUPVwrQf2GSD86ykBegBAss3g@mail.gmail.com> <20140323224318.GB26683@xanadu.blop.info> <CAKTje6HDEHSruC=FpBQTPv6+Z7EuzuJeHuk_1rFN7rVQ3uTX_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Paul Wise dijo [Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 07:21:07AM +0800]:
> In practice almost everyone has non-free in their sources.list due to
> most firmware being non-free. Also most developers will have non-free
> in their sources.list due to various GNU documentation being in
> non-free.
Don't know. In my case, and in all of the machines I have aided
configure, if non-free firmware is required, I just download that
package and install it, without adding non-free. As a developer, I
very often use online documentation.
> Also most users will have non-free in their sources.list due
> to things like Flash.
That, sadly, is true.
But anyway - I'm pushing this to -curiosa, as I think it is not on
topic for -vote. Ok, the original question is, but all this further
ellaboration not so.
Reply to: