Re: Java, mplayer
Quoting Bijan Soleymani <bijan@psq.com>:
> Joel Konkle-Parker <jjk3@msstate.edu> writes:
>
> > Why can't Sun's j2re and mplayer be provided in non-free or contrib?
> > I've read various things about how their legal status is
> > incompatible with Debian's DFSG, but I thought that's what non-free
> > was for in the first place.
>
> Things in non-free must be freely distributable in binary form. I
> don't think Sun's java allows that. I think it even puts restrictions
> on that.
Ok, I can understand that. But why must non-free distribute in binary form? I've
dabbled in Gentoo for a little while, and they have a system that prompts for
download of the j2re from Sun, then performs its own tasks on it. That would be
equivalent to the following:
--
# apt-get install sun-j2re
downloading... yada yada
This package requires Sun's j2re package to be downloaded seperately. Please
visit http://java.sun.com/whatever and place j2re.version.run into your current
working directory. Then re-run apt-get.
# *visit, agree to eula, download*
# apt-get install sun-j2re
*finds j2re.version.run, installs, makes menu items, configs, etc.*
#
--
This way, the only things being distributed are the configuration scripts.
> As for mplayer the thing with that is that mplayer in its natural
> state might contain certain patent or copyright violations, making it
> illegal to distribute it. Debian could remove those parts but then it
> would make mplayer useless. The developpers of mplayer have said that
> they don't want people to distribute cut down versions of mplayer
> because people will laugh at the results ("what do you mean this
> player can't play .avi, real, or quicktime?").
This one makes a little more sense. Although what's different about this and
libdvdcss? We have a somewhat convulated process for installing libdvdcss with
ogle, but it works.
--
Joel Konkle-Parker
Webmaster [Ballsome.com]
Phone [662-518-1636]
E-mail [jjk3@msstate.edu]
Reply to: