Re: Inconsistent handling of sourceless packages in main

[Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>]

Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> writes:

> Moin Goswin!
> Goswin von Brederlow schrieb am Donnerstag, den 19. Mai 2005:
>
>> IMHO debian-installer in unacceptable as it causes GPL violations.
>> Interlocking the debian-installer builds with the exact source
> ...
>> Any ideas? Comments? Solutions?
>
> Relax, there is no problem. (The same was as there is no problem with
> boot-floppies, beeing in Woody without the correct source. Nobody did
> care in the last 3 years).
>
> Regards,
> Eduard.
> -- 
> In the beginning was the word, and the word was content-type: text/plain

I do care. But I also have no evil intention and won't sue.

I mainly care for the bloat for ia32-libs and similar
packages. Creating a 300MB ia32-OOo package and uploading that on each
change was/is insane enough to release amd64/ia64 without it.

But I can't in good faith fight for doing it the debian-installer way
and build debs that will regulary be without source. It would be hard
to convince ftp-master to do the "wrong" thing after they already
decided to do the "right" thing anyway.

That's why I'm looking for any idea to have binaries rebuild from debs
in debian without risking them being sourceless. Maybe a patch for the
DAK and an extra entry in the control file? Come on, spin your minds,
think of something. :)

MfG
        Goswin