Re: libpcap and libnet-pcap-perl
On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 03:45:35PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> Things seem to be getting healthier - there are three RC bugs left. One
> is brokenness on sparc64 (?),
Hmm. I'll have a shot at that, although I don't own a sparc so that might
be a bit troublesome to test.
> one is a licensing problem which has been
> around forever and as such should be ignorable for the purposes of
> moving the new glibc to testing,
OK, this one looks a bit ugly...
1) On the point of the GNU Free doc license: if the -legal people decide
that the docs are indeed non-free, then what are we going to do? Re-write
parts of glibc? Split up the package? (We can't have main depend on
non-free, if that's where it ends up.) I guess the fundamental issue is
whether to treat documentation as code w.r.t. to the freely-modifiable
requirement of the DFSG. But I'm admittedly ignorant in this area, so I'll
shut up now before I start another flamewar. :-)
2) the SUNRPC code does look quite worrisome, though. We're still
"somewhat" OK when dealing with the GFDL, but if we're violating Sun's
license, that could mean serious trouble which we don't want Debian to get
> and one is a build failure on s390 which is fixed in CVS.
OK. Then things are looking good finally.
Although, on a side note, I find it rather unsettling to count the number
of important bugs filed against glibc, some of which are quite old. Maybe
I should put off hunting down old bugs for the moment, and take a shot at
During the Age of Enlightenment, progress was made through the realization
that the universe operates according to consistent principles, and that
achievement comes from the consistent application of the same. So why is it
that today people seek for the chaotic and bizarre and call it "progress"?