Re: Dealing with drivers that need firmware on the filesystem
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 02:53:52PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 12:59:08PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > > No more nonsensical than the fact that code within a program that
> > > makes optional use of a non-free library can go in main, while a
> > > program consisting soley of that code must go in contrib.
> >
> > Of course it is. If you only rely on package boundaries, you could
> > in theory move all of contrib into main by bundling it all into a
> > single package that has at least one completely free component.
>
> Dependencies do not make a component any less Free than a component
> lacking dependencies. The whole purpose of contrib (at least in my
> mind) is to indicate to users that they will need something extra from
> non-free or even something we can't distribute to make useful use of
> the program in contrib.
I believe contrib exists because, as the SC states, "we will never make
the system depend on an item of non-free software."
> Being in contrib doesn't mean that a work is evil, nor is contrib a
> second cousin to non-free.
It means it is "not a part of Debian," and won't be distributed on most
Debian CD sets. It essentially means that hardware that needs drivers
in contrib is not supported by Debian. There's a good chance Debian
won't even be installable on such a system.
> You could conceivably move all of contrib into main by making it into
> a package that did something useful. Of course, a package made in the
> way you describe would not be useful at all.
Of course it would be useful--it has a driver that "depends" on no
"non-free software". Stupid? Very. But still useful...
--
For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you!
Reply to: