On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:12:09PM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: > * Hans Ekbrand <hans.ekbrand@sociology.gu.se> [2009-01-22 15:19:14 CET]: > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 02:24:34PM +0100, Bin Zhang wrote: > > > You can use mplayer and mozilla-mplayer (debian packages). You need > > > realmedia codecs. Two options for installing the codecs: > > > - run > > > /usr/share/mplayer/scripts/binary_codecs.sh install > > > - install Linux PPC 20071007 codecs in your /usr/lib/codecs from > > > http://www1.mplayerhq.hu/design7/dload.html > > > > > > You'll need installing the package libstdc++.so.5. > > > > Both of these, are not-the-debian-way. > > Says who? The binary_codecs.sh script infact _is_ the Debian way. Generally, running install scripts is *not* the debian way, apt-get is. I don't know the details in this particular case. > > Why not just apt-get from www.debian-multimedia.org? > > Because that's not-the-debian-way. Maybe not in your contry, but maybe in countries that does not acknowledge software patents. I don't now your particular situation, but this is my guess. > But when it comes to non-free stuff > one has to jump through hoops anyway. The current definition of non-free in Debian is, AFAIK, adopted to fit citizens in countries which acknowledge software patents. In countries which does not acknowledge software patents, some software which is in www.debian-multimedia.org is Free software. Perhaps you remember that debian once had a section named "non-us" which where provided to non-us users (and by servers located outside US). This infrastructure for distributing free software was created in order to get around the US export restrictions for strong crypto. Without it, Debian would not have been able to provide the same software for all users, since Debian when would have (in some cases) exported the strong crypto software from US to users in other countries, which the export restrictions did not allow. My point here is that software patents impose the same kind of restriction, it only applies in some contries, so Debian could set up servers in the countries that does not acknowledge software patents, and the citizens of these countries could benefit from this Free software. I live in Sweden, which does not acknowledge software patents, and therefore it would be perfectly legal for Debian to have ftp.se.debian.org provide me - and everyone else who is a citizen (and is living in) a country which does not acknowledge software patents - nice GPL software which would have been protected by software patents in some other countries. In my eyes, www.debian-multimedia.org is such a service. The only thing that I miss is that the packages is complied and signed by the normal debian maintainers and built on a official debian machine, and that Debian officially acknowledge these packages as "part of Debian". Now, I haven't checked all the details of the mplayer package provided by www.debian-multimedia.org, but I thought mplayer was GPL, isn't it? If it is, then why do you call it "non-free stuff"? Isn't that a way of framing the issue that accepts the idea of software patents? Kind regards, -- Hans Ekbrand (http://sociologi.cjb.net) <hans@sociologi.cjb.net> GPG Fingerprint: 1408 C8D5 1E7D 4C9C C27E 014F 7C2C 872A 7050 614E
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature