Re: Enabling and installing of "risky" ("patented") codecs - made easy
Thank you very much for your replies to my concern. However I'd like to
comment on some of them until the thread dies acknowledged and forgotten...
> It's not actually dead, but in a kryogenic freeze. [...]
Thanks for your answer. I hope you don't mind if I take over (active)
maintainership for all those packages in the meantime... ;)
> We should just create a separate archive like non-us, e.g. non-pat,
> which's primary host would reside somewhere where multimedia software
> patents are moot. (I suppose france would be alright, since debian-
> multimedia is hosted there). d-i should offer to add these sources.
Yes, we will need a separate archive for these packages which will be
hosted outside the US. I am not sure if d-i should offer to add these
sources (not sure if it's worth another question during installation),
but the URI could be included in the default sources.list but commented
out with a disclaimer.
> How about just using non-free for that? In the past, patented packages
> like gif encoders have been hosted there, so why can't we just use them
> for mpeg encoders as well?
I don't think that non-free ist the right place, beacuse (a) the
non-free archive is hosted on nearly every mirror, even in the US and
(b) the software isn't non-free. It's perfectly free from a license POV.
As Clint Adams suggested I also think you're thinking of non-us.
> Please note though that non-us was hosted outside of the US,
> but was supposed to contain packages that were legal in the US,
> but simply could not be exported from the US (cypto software).
> Because of its name, people started putting other things there
> were not legal in the US, but that is very different than its
This need to be avoided! I suggest that, if such a repository will be
created for patented codecs, that e.g. sponsored uploads will not be
allowed to this archive. I know that most of you will hate this idea,
but I believe it is necessary to keep the original purpose of such an