Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?

To: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 14:41:50 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20031119134150.GA15981@deneb.enyo.de>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 1069067039.3089.4.camel@atari.antcom.de>
References: <[🔎] 1069067039.3089.4.camel@atari.antcom.de>

Roland Stigge wrote:

> debian-legalint

I don't think this is a good idea.  "non-free" doesn't mean "illegal".

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?
  - From: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
- Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?
  - From: Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net>
- Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?
  - From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>

References:
- Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?
  - From: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>

Prev by Date: Re: perl 5.8.2-2 & mips buildd
Next by Date: Re: Some observations regardig the progress towards Debian 3.1
Previous by thread: Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?
Next by thread: Re: Is vrms really still a Virtual Richard M. Stallman?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread