[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: "non-free" software included in contrib

Ola Lundqvist <opal@debian.org> a tapoté :

> Hi
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 01:13:17PM +0200, Tore Anderson wrote:
> > 
> >   I've noticed there's quite a few almost-empty packages lurking in
> >  the archive, whose sole purpose seems to be to download non-free
> >  software and install it on a users' systems.
> > 
> >   I don't like the fact that these seem to be (randomly) scattered
> >  over main and contrib.  Although the installer packages themselves
> >  certainly are Free, I feel the social contract is being violated
> >  when I have main and contrib in my sources.list file, but after
> >  having completed the installation of a package from these sections,
> >  non-free software is installed on my system.
> > 
> >   Here's a quick list of suspected packages:
> > 
> >     vtkdata-installer               optional
> Installs example reference data. It could probably stay there.
> >     acl-installer                   contrib/devel
> >     acl-pro-installer               contrib/devel
> >     atokx                           contrib/utils
> >     daemontools-installer           contrib/misc
> >     djbdns-installer                contrib/net
> >     f-prot-installer                contrib/utils
> Contrib is a perfectly ok place for installers.
> >     flashplugin-nonfree             optional
> This is in contrib!
> >     hyperspec                       optional
> Also in contrib!
> >     ibm-jdk1.1-installer            contrib/devel
> >     int-fiction-installer           contrib/games
> >     lw-per-installer                contrib/devel
> >     lw-pro-installer                contrib/devel
> >     msttcorefonts                   contrib/graphics
> >     nvidia-kernel-src               contrib/x11
> >     nvidia-glx-src                  contrib/x11
> >     qmailanalog-installer           contrib/mail
> >     quake2-data                     contrib/games
> >     roxen-ssl                       contrib/web
> >     roxen2-ssl                      contrib/web
> >     sdic-edict                      contrib/text
> >     sdic-gene95                     contrib/text
> >     setiathome                      contrib/misc
> Contrib is a ok place for installers.
> >     realplayer                      net
> I can not find this in the archives.
> >   I've not verified all of these being such installer packages for
> >  non-free software, nor do I claim it to be complete.  Just to give
> >  you a rough idea.  Also, they're of different nature -- some install
> >  the non-free software from their post-installation scripts, while
> >  others install a script in /usr/sbin/ which will do the installation
> >  of the non-free software when run.
> > 
> >   I'd like to submit bugs on these, asking them to move to non-free.
> >  So consider this email an invitation to discussion before a mass-bug
> >  filing.
> > 
> >   If the list agrees that bugs are warranted, which severity should I
> >  use?  In my opinion it's a violation of the social contract and thus
> >  serious, but I've been recently told I should probably not use my
> >  own opinion as a justification for using the RC levels, so mayhaps
> >  wishlist would be better?
> I can not find any bugs in this list. So please do not fine anyone.
> The contrib section is precisely for free software that depends on
> non-free (or software outside the archives) to be able to work as
> expected.

There is a difference between "software that depends on non-free
software to run" and "free installer of non-free software".

A software in contrib that have only the purpose of installing a
non-free software in is postinst script is, IMHO, maybe a good
candidate for non-free: it's not really a dependancy but a package
that include a non-free software -- even if the non-free software is
kept separated, outside the package.

A packaged installer is almost a subpackaging: we could include every
software in non-free in contrib, if we make free packages that download
from the net the non-free packages. So the distinction
non-free/contrib would be useless...

For instance, I make a package called satan-installer with a postinst
script that execute the following command:
http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/dists/potato/non-free/binary-i386/admin/satan_1.1.1-18.deb && dpkg -i satan_1.1.1-18.deb
would you like to include that satan-installer script in contrib?

It's almost how works flashplugin-nonfree.

So I do not agree that "Contrib is a ok place for installers". While
basically these installer are free software, it's a little bit
hypocritical to claim that these package contains free software.

Finally, someone who install the contrib flashplugin-nonfree get on
his computer a non-free software, possibly without even noticing it,
because he never seen a dependancy against a package in non-free. 

Mathieu Roy
  Not a native english speaker: 

Reply to: