Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main (was: Bug#353277: should be in contrib)
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 05:01:21PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Well, aside from not believing that anyone is going to use CIPE under
> ndiswrapper (without someone stepping forward and testifying that this is
> the case for them), I see a distinction between "wine is necessary in order
> for you to run app $foo on Debian" and "ndiswrapper is necessary in order
> for you to run Debian on hardware $foo".
That is a very fine distinction, if it's a distinction at all, considering
that the latter statement can easily be rewritten "ndiswrapper is necessary
in order for you to load drivers for hardware $foo", which is almost
identical to the former.
Also, the latter statement isn't really 100% valid, since Debian will still
run without the ndiswrapper driver. It just won't be able to connect to
As far as the second statement being the reason that most of us want
ndiswrapper in main, that may be true, but it is no excuse to ignore rules
that are very clearly laid out in the SC and DFSG.
Adam McKenna <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>