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

Re: main or contrib?



On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 08:50:00 -0400 Michael Poole wrote:

[...]
> I personally disagree -- on the grounds that the software works as it
> should without the blobs, and the hardware is what fails to provide
> the necessary interface -- but mine is a minority viewpoint.

By that line of reasoning, a non-free-kernel could be seen as a means to
cause the hardware to provide the necessary interface, and any
user-space DFSG-compliant program could go in main, even if it somehow
requires the non-free-kernel in order to be useful.

Or you could conceive the kernel + non-free-interpreter combination as a
means to cause the hardware to provide the necessary interface, and any
DFSG-compliant script could go in main, even when it requires the
non-free-interpreter in order to be useful.


IOW, I'm not convinced by your argument.

-- 
But it is also tradition that times *must* and always
do change, my friend.   -- from _Coming to America_
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpYlcN5qkj4S.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: