Re: Another one... _):
On 1 May 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> What is the proper thing to do with a package which is free,
> but whose capabilities would be impaired (some would say seriously
> impaired) unless a package from the non-free distribution is also
> installed? (I am talking about LaTeX2HTML and netpbm; LaTeX2HTML runs
> latex on snippets of the origina that can't be translated into HTML,
> and then converts the dvi file to ps which it converts to xbm and
> then to a gif file, inlined in the final product).
> Does this mean that LaTeX2HTML should be moved to non-free as
> well? The current solution is to merely recommend netpbm, even though
> this is non-free.
According to the current policy, a "free" package that is depending on a
package in non-free has to go into "contrib". This also applies to
packages recommending a package in non-free in some cases. (This merely
depends on how much the other package is needed.)
-- _,, Christian Schwarz
/ o \__ firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
! ___; firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
\\\______/ ! PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7 34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA
\ / http://fatman.mathematik.tu-muenchen.de/~schwarz/
"DIE ENTE BLEIBT DRAUSSEN!"
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .