[Michael Poole] > What's the purpose of an assembler without assembly code to use it > on? Despite Anthony's claim, I see no packages that can use nasm out > of the box If you hadn't already shot your credibility, you just did. Anthony listed a dozen or so packages in Debian which require nasm in order to build. How can you "see no packages" when he gave you an explicit list of them? > If you want to move ndiswrapper to contrib, I expect the next step is > to do the same to libflash, for the same reasons. There's a big difference between enabling someone to install non-free software, and enabling someone to view data. (Some of which is free, some not.) Also, in case this was your point, swf content is sometimes generated with free tools such as ploticus. > move interpreter and compilers for Java bytecode to contrib. After > all, the point of Java is to allow the running of non-free software. > Mono and DotGNU would get the same treatment. Right? No, the point of Java is to allow users to run Java software, which they may or may not have written themselves, and which may or may not be free software. Examples of all permutations of the above are really easy to find. Can you say the same of ndiswrapper? Please be prepared to present the testimonials of all the Windows driver developers you know who really wish they could conveniently test their Windows drivers on Debian, because I find it hard to believe there are any. We've already established that nobody can find any free Windows drivers for use with ndiswrapper, except one which is pointless as it's a port of a driver Debian already has as native code.
Description: Digital signature