Re: Bug#989645: /usr/sbin/grub-mkconfig: dpkg: error processing package linux-image-powerpc (--configure):
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 08:03:38AM -0600, Stan Johnson wrote:
> Some people find it to be important to install only free software.
>
> If hfsprogs were truly non-free, then an alternative would need to be
> found, since hfsprogs provides required functionality.
>
> I read the above links, which lead to this analysis:
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/06/msg00573.html
>
> Is it really correct that debian-legal has concluded that hfsprogs is
> not DFSG-free? Or is the above analysis an opinion from someone who is
> not a Debian lawyer?
>
> In this case, the Free Software Foundation (FSF) disagrees, saying "The
> Apple Public Source License (APSL) version 2.0 qualifies as a free
> software license. Apple's lawyers worked with the FSF to produce a
> license that would qualify."
>
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/apsl.en.html
>
> I would generally accept FSF legal analyses and opinions over the legal
> (or non-legal) analyses and opinions from anyone associated with any
> specific GNU/Linux distribution.
FSF created a documentation license that is non-free in Debian. So FSF
doesn't seem like a good judge of what is or is not free. Their focus
is a lot more narrow than Debian's in terms of what freedom's users
should have.
Reading the entry from debian-legal, I would think that it is absolutely
correct that it is non-free in Debian.
--
Len Sorensen
Reply to: