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

Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main

On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 10:16:38PM +0000, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Thomas Bushnell BSG said:
> > I think this is clearly incorrect.  The DFSG and the SC do not say
> > anything about the requirements for main that I can see.
> This is a clear misunderstanding, AFAICT.  Point 1 of the SC says that "We
> will never make the system require the use of a non-free component", and
> the DFSG define the difference between free and non-free.  Since require
> in the technical sense is expressed through dependencies (although I
> have seen someone assert with explanation that package dependencies don't
> matter here, for some reason), it is rather clear to me that ndiswrapper

Actual dependencies are not always expressed in debian/control, because
sometimes a required item is not packaged. (This is one of the reasons
why a package would go into contrib.)

For example, flashplugin-nonfree requires the non-free flash plugin from
Macromedia to provide its functionality. That plugin is not packaged
(hence the need for the installer, flashplugin-nonfree) so clearly this
dependency cannot be expressed in the control file.

flashplugin-nonfree itself contains scripts which I presume meet the
DFSG. Do you think we should put it in main?

> ndiswrapper is a piece of free software.  It does not need non-free tools
> to build, and it will execute as a standalone app without any drivers.

(And do what? Display a usage screen? Anything more?)

> The fact that most people use it to enable non-free drivers to work is
> largely irrelevant - most people use wine and various other emulators
> for similar purposes.

This is also true of flashplugin-nonfree.

Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>

Reply to: