Re: Comments on Debian packages and installation
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Comments on Debian packages and installation
- From: David Frey <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 21:27:05 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 19990108212705.D1364@eos.lugs.ch>
- In-reply-to: <19990107184802.B5828@whitestar.soark.net>; from Zephaniah E, Hull on Thu, Jan 07, 1999 at 06:48:02PM -0500
- References: <199901052226.PAA16445@fat-tire.col.hp.com> <199901071450.JAA18713@psilocin.gnu.org> <19990107193453.A756@galactic.demon.net> <19990107223008.D218@nyx.eos.lugs.ch> <19990107184802.B5828@whitestar.soark.net>
On Thu, Jan 07, 1999 at 06:48:02PM -0500, Zephaniah E, Hull wrote:
>(Note that I set the Reply-To header to -devel, as it seems to be agreed
>that this is not a -private issue)
>On Thu, Jan 07, 1999 at 10:30:08PM +0100, David Frey wrote:
>> I disagree. Just because a government made silly rules about the
>> use of some software it is not generally non-DFSG.
>> I suggest to sort out the packages in non-US into the proper categories:
>> non-US/main # DFSG-free, non-importable-for-US packages,
>> non-US/contrib # DFSG-free, but dependant on non-US/non-free,
>> non-US/non-free # non-DFSG-free, import-restricted.
>Errrrrm, I assume you mean
>non-US/main # DFSG-free, non-exportable-for-US packages,
>non-US/contrib # DFSG-free, but dependent on non-US/non-free,
>non-US/non-free # non-DFSG-free, export-restricted.
Ups. Mostly, yes. There may be patent-restricted packages though (RSA
comes to mind...), which couldn't be imported into US.