Mathieu Roy wrote: > So finally now you answered about the theorical proposal I made at > first (I asked to put these packages in non-free or to force the > installer to build the proper package). > > Is there anybody else that thinks too that these packages belongs to > non-free / think that the installer should build a proper package? In the rare instances in the past when I have used installer packages for non-free software, no, I have been more interested in a package that can keep the non-free software up-to-date during upgrades. And I cannot see how packages that build debs or merely offer commands to build debs can do so. I'm much more annoyed/concerned that mozilla, mozilla-firebird, and galeon all obtrusuvely offer (over and over again and there's no obvious way to even turn it off) to install non-free software every time I visit a site with flash on it. I think that's an example of something not unlike installer packages in _main_ that ought to be dealt with. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
pgp7cKTQTokhj.pgp
Description: PGP signature