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

Re: pine (was: Re: debian-faq: patch5 to remove some outdated content)



Hi,

Hendrik Boom <hendrik@topoi.pooq.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 08:50:25PM +0200, Holger Wansing wrote:
> > It might be useful, to document these two szenarios, so here we go:
> > 
> > 
> > 	<p>Due to restrictions in their licenses source code may or may not 
> > 	be available for packages in the "contrib" and "non-free" directories, 
> > 	which are not formally part of the Debian system. 
> > 	There are some packages, for which the source code is available,
> > 	but not distributable via the Debian archive, so it has to be pulled 
> > 	from the site of the origin author or company when installing.
> > 	Examples for this case are the <tt>broadcom-sta-*</tt> packages, a 
> > 	driver for Broadcom wireless adapters.
> > 	Moreover to this, the source code might not be available at all
> > 	and only a binary "blob" is distributed by the origin company.
> > 	A notable example for this is the Adobe Flash plugin in the
> > 	<tt>flashplugin-nonfree</tt> package.
> > 
> > 
> > Comments?
> 
> But was the mention of nvidia dropped deliberately or accidentally?
> Is nvidia not one of these binary blob packages?  Or was it just a 
> matter of the paragraph being long enough already?

I would vote for only mentioning some cases as examples, without trying
to be complete. That list would become too extensive IMHO. And always
lacking some.
And: as examples I thought the above cases fit better: only few packages
(respective one), while for nvidia there a masses of packages, and
I was unable to overlook which ones are of the above category and which
ones are probably not.


Holger

-- 
============================================================
Created with Sylpheed 3.5.0 under
	D E B I A N   L I N U X   8 . 0   " J E S S I E " .

Registered Linux User #311290 - https://linuxcounter.net/
============================================================


Reply to: