Re: RFS: libsbml
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Charles Plessy wrote:
What is happening to a source package with build-dependancies on a
non-free package. Can it produce a binary packages for main, with only a
-doc package going in contrib? Do the Debian buildds have non-free
enabled? (I doubt...)
It is quite a sloppy issue. The reaosn is that the resulting binary doc
package does not even need any non-free stuff so there is no real reason
to move it to contrib. This is quite a difficult topic and might be
either discussed here or on debian-legal (perhaps on debian-devel).
In this special case I wrote in private mail to Changyan Xie that I
would rethink my request for compiling html from source because we are
perfectly able to patch HTML documents (in contrast to PDFs) and would
avoid serious and quite boring licensing issues. In the other hand
Do you think that there are other converters around which can to the
same job ?
I have just read that there are two other free converters. I would
give these a chance before continue thinking about nasty licensing
issues.
If we decide to keep latex2html, maybe we can try to add
texlive-latex-recommended and texlive-fonts-recommended to the
build-dependancies, so that it would avoid to use tetex-extra?
If there is an alternative dependency on a package you need in your
build dependencies you could list it in you build dependencies as
well as an alternative (if I'm not completely wrong). Either the
build dependency is fullfilled on your machine or in a chroot the
first alternative is choosen (not tested but guessed).
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: