Re: Debian AMD64 Archive Move
John Hasler <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Ed Cogburn writes:
>> Wait a second, if you *aren't* Debian, it should be *easier* for you to
>> provide non-free, not harder. The only problem with non-free is the
>> internal politics of Debian. Ubuntu certainly doesn't have any problem
>> providing access to, but not support for, non-free.
> One of the common reasons for packages to be in non-free is that they have
> "non-commercial" clauses in their licenses. This means that Debian can
> distribute them free of charge but they cannot be put on CDs and sold. In
> some cases they may not even be _used_ for anything but "personal use".
> Others contain clauses forbidding their use for certain purposes or by
> certain agencies. The only thing you can say for sure about all the
> packages in non-free is that Debian can make them available for
> downloading. Anyone contemplating redistributing non-free should examine
> the license in every single package.
> John Hasler
More specifically: Debian can distribute those sources and debs
Debian may not be allowed to rebuild the source or build it for more
archs (or distribute any debs, only source, as is the case for pine).