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

Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main

This one time, at band camp, Thomas Bushnell BSG said:
> Stephen Gran <sgran@debian.org> writes:
> > Additionally, the use of the phrase "useful in a system with only free
> > software on it" is not something I can find in either 2.2.1 or 2.2.2
> > (where the difference between main and contrib is spelled out) or
> > anywhere in our foundation documents.  Can you point me to where this
> > requirement is mentioned in our policy and/or foundation documents?  
> It's not in the foundation documents, it's in the definition of
> contrib.  Please remember, the Debian Policy Manual is not a
> "foundation document".

I see you have failed to notice the 'and/or' construct in the part that
you quoted.  Now that I have drawn your attention to it, we can leave
Reading Comprehension 101 behind us.

> In any case, the real point here is the following statement from
> 2.2.2, which says that contrib is for "wrapper packages or other sorts
> of free accessories for non-free programs."

Since ndiswrapper's main purpose is to create a kernel API to allow
drivers designed for a different API to communicate with the kernel, I
don't think this counts as a wrapper.  ndiswrapper does what it sets out
to do, whether or not any software (free or not) uses that API.

> So the question is, is ndiswrapper for free programs, or only for
> non-free programs?

No, the question is, is ndiswrapper a functionally complete program?
Other pieces of software, both free and non-free, are free to use it in
order to run, but I can't imagine that makes any difference to the
freeness of ndiswrapper.

> But I don't know; everyone seems to be dancing around the actual
> question: are there any free drivers for which ndiswrapper is useful?

This is an irrelevant question, which is why you're not getting an
answer you're happy with.

> Moreover, the statements in 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 are *exemplars*, not final
> absolute standards.  Remember, Policy is not a foundation document.

We left this class earlier, you may remember.

> But rather than argue about what *might* be so, geez, can *somebody*
> PLEASE, just answer the factual question?

Yes.  Non-free drivers need ndiswrapper.  ndiswrapper does not need
non-free drivers.  There is no dependency.  Does that help?
|   ,''`.                                            Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :                                        sgran@debian.org |
|  `. `'                        Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-                                     http://www.debian.org |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: