Re: practical difference between "main" and "contrib"/"non-free" package sections
Hi.
Please refrain from personal e-mail. It's considered inapproprate here.
I'm sending this e-mail to the list and suggesting you to do the same
with your original e-mail.
On Thu, 4 Jun 2015 21:38:15 +0300
Mister EpicMannow <misterepicmannow@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for your explanation.
> I understand now, what problems can one meet, if he deals with non-free.
> So:
> 'non-free' packages get security fixes, bug fixes, other changes only when
> it is possible according to license
> 'non-free' packages may have no sources available
> in terms of support (except two statements above) 'non-free' packages are
> just like 'main' packages.
> 'contrib' packages are in terms of support just like 'main' packages
> ''contrib' and 'non-free' packages will remain in the repositories for as
> long as there are people ready to maintain them, and they get upstream
> upgrades (just like packages in 'main').
> Correct?
Correct, with one exception. If 'non-free' package does not have the
source - it's impossible to fix it. Either the vendor should provide
the fix (and it can take months if not years for this to happen), or
you (as distribution) continue to ship vulnerable software (or firmware
as it all the same in this regard), or you drop the offending package
entirely.
Reco
Reply to: