[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main (was: Bug#353277: should be in contrib)

Robert Millan writes:

> Policy:
> "2.2.2 The contrib section
> [...]
> Examples of packages which would be included in contrib are:

Here's the part that you left out:

 * free packages which require contrib, non-free packages or packages
   which are not in our archive at all for compilation or execution,

>     *      wrapper packages or other sorts of free accessories for non-free programs.
> "
> > Without something to work on, an assembler is just as useless as
> > ndiswrapper.  Which package(s) in main depend on nasm?
> You can check that yourself.  I guess a few dozens.
> > Why not file a
> > bug report against it, demanding that it be moved to contrib?
> Because it's free software that processes asm input, and there is a significant
> amount of useful, free i386 asm that makes nasm necessary ?

But nasm requires such assembly for useful execution!  This is the
same situation as ndiswrapper.  Neither are very useful unless you use
them with software that is not in main.  They both *compile* and
*execute* without extra software, which is all that policy requires.

You are the one who insists that the execution must be "free, non-toy,
non-POC", and that is why I said that if you want to change the state
of things, you should revise the DFSG or policy.

Michael Poole

Reply to: