Re: "non-free" software included in contrib
- To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: "non-free" software included in contrib
- From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
- Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:40:48 -0500
- Message-id: <[🔎] 871xuz246n.fsf@glaurung.green-gryphon.com>
- In-reply-to: <m3n0dp965t.fsf@dionysos.nib> (Mathieu Roy's message of "31 Aug 2003 17:51:42 +0200")
- References: <uiud6em9j1u.fsf@echo.linpro.no> <20030831114026.GA938@chrystal.opal.dhs.org> <m365kednhv.fsf_-_@dionysos.nib> <20030831124846.GA1004@twinette.migus.eu.org> <20030831111758.07d6e6b3.kov@debian.org> <m3n0dp965t.fsf@dionysos.nib>
On 31 Aug 2003 17:51:42 +0200, Mathieu Roy <yeupou@gnu.org> said:
> But now we're discussing about it and I express my opinion: since
> these packages in their postinst script install non-free stuff, I
> think that even if there's no non-free stuff within the packages
> themselves, the result of the installation of these packages (and
> not their dependancies!) is to get non-free stuff. And so, it leads
> me to the conclusion that, whatever the fact that the non-free part
> is downloaded at the same time than the debian package or not, this
> package itself contains non-free stuff.
This is no different from any package in contrib that actually
depends on non-free software. You seem to be implying that contrib is
only supposed to be composed of software that may build depend on
non-free packages, but may not depend on, or install, non-free
packages.
That is not how contrib is defined, sorry.
manoj
--
Bolub's Fourth Law of Computerdom: Project teams detest weekly
progress reporting because it so vividly manifests their lack of
progress.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: