On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 05:09:35PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Samuel Bronson <email@example.com>, 2012-01-21, 00:38: > >* Package name : gcc-4.5-doc-non-dfsg > > Does "non-dfsg" really need to be a part of source package name? > What if FSF decides to free the documentation one day? Then this source package will disappear, and its binary will be built from pristine gcc sources. It contains parts that have been removed from gcc-4.5, all of them are non-free due to GFDL issues. -- 1KB // Yo momma uses IPv4!
Description: Digital signature