El sáb, 18-02-2006 a las 09:40 +0100, Robert Millan escribió: > On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 08:14:38PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote: > > > > Then please work to revise [Removed false premise fallacy] > > Last time your argument was that free NDIS drivers exist, so the situation is > analogous to wine. Nobody bothered to check, but it turns out that only one > free driver exists, and it's pretty pointless since it's a port of something we > already have. > > Ok, quoting: > > Social Contract: > > "We will never make the system require the use of a non-free component." And ndiswrapper does not require it. It will only be useless without a driver, not a non-free driver. At most you could ask for it to be removed as "useless piece of software" (which is not and we have a lot of that in Debian is some way or other). BTW, if we start being more intregrist than those burning consulates because of some drawings, we should start by removing GPG signatures and md5sums from main, as those are invariant bits. Cheers, -- Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo jsogo@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada digitalmente