Re: installer for non-free packages in contrib
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:42:46PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
[Please stop sending me private copies of list mail.]
> Colin Watson <email@example.com> a tapot? :
> > On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 01:08:34PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > > Colin Watson <firstname.lastname@example.org> a tapot? :
> > > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 09:35:45AM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > > > > Would it be acceptable to fill a bug against each installer
> > > > > that do not build a proper debian package when installing
> > > > > non-free software?
> > > >
> > > > How can they do so? Installing a package with 'dpkg -i' in the
> > > > postinst of another package isn't possible, since dpkg's status
> > > > area is locked.
> > >
> > > At this point, the question is not how to do it
> > I think it absolutely is. If something is impossible to do correctly
> > then filing  bugs against packages claiming that they don't do it is
> > rather unfair.
> At this point, the question is not how to do it. I can think about 30
> ways to do it, while I'm surely not the expert here.
I asked you a question which could be answered quite simply by producing
one of those ways. Go on. It's my honest belief that it can't be done
correctly; I'm open to hearing ways in which I'm wrong.
> So I'll rephrase my question to avoid having you being obstructive.
Er, I'm not being obstructive! I'm trying to figure out if there's any
point to your proposed mass-bug-filing.
> Would it be acceptable to fill a bug against each installer that do
> not build a proper debian package when installing non-free software,
> as long as a technical solution is provided?
I guess so, if the technical solution is correct. Severity something
less than release-critical, though.
Colin Watson [email@example.com]