Re: Re^2: why ddd-?motif are gone from archive?
Marco.Budde@hqsys.antar.com (Marco Budde) writes:
> Am 05.03.98 schrieb sr1 # os.inf.tu-dresden.de ...
> SR> For -smotif: Whenever a program works sufficiently well with lesstif
> SR> we don't need the -smotif version anymore.
> How can you test that?
What's the final test for the Debian System? People will tell you when
things don't work.
If a lesstif-compiled program causes problems for you, file a bug
report. Bug reports are a general method to notify the maintainer that
some program doesn't work as expected. For ddd this worked.
> SR> For -dmotif: There aren't that many people having a licensed Motif
> SR> shared library.
> That#s not true.
This depends on the choosen definition of "not that many" (BTW: Above
I'm talking about Linux, and in addition I don't count bootlegs.) I'd
be interested in numbers: How many Motif runtimes (+ development) were
sold for Linux? How many of these are used on Debian systems?
(Here I have about twenty computers and one Motif licence. So a
-dmotif package is useless on most computers.)
> SR> shared library. IMHO its up to the package maintainer whether he
> SR> creates the -dmotif package.
> If the maintainer doesn#t own a Motif license he can#t maintain the
Even when it works fine with lesstif? Again: Why?
> SR> -dmotif.) That fact that -dmotif is contrary to free software politics
> SR> is expressed by placing it into contrib, so we don't need to create
> SR> additional punishment.
> I (and a lot of users) don#t have a problem to use commercial programs.
Others supposedly do. For those I provided above reasoning.
Sven Rudolph <firstname.lastname@example.org>
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to email@example.com
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .