On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 cor...@free.fr wrote:
On 13/03/2023 10:12, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
On Sun, Mar 12, 2023 at 9:02 PM <cor...@free.fr> wrote:
When such a debian (the digital product) is authentic, should we say it
"real debian" or "true debian"?
I am not sure about this statement.
Fee Fie Foe Fum
I smell the Blood of a True Scots Man [1]
I am having trouble parsing what you are asking... What is the context?
Debian provides distribution media, and it has Debian packages and
installs a Debian system. If it is not a Debian system, then it is not
a Debian installer and does not have Debian packages.
I'm not sure what "true" and "authentic" have to do with things.
Maybe you are talking about the signature?
No. I meant, some people pre-installed some packages on debian and release
it, which is declared as xxx-debian.
I am just not sure about the two words "true" and "real". which is suitable
for description of the "official" debian?
In the context you offer, my opinion is that "true" and "real" are as
nearly synonymous as two distinct terms can be. ("Authentic" is their
close cousin.)
And their meaning is remarkably subjective:
"Official Debian installation media do not contain non-free
firmware."
"But what about updated social contract #5, which officially permits
this?" [2]
"Ahem. {*Real*,*True*} Debian installation media do not contain
non-free firmware."
The term "official" itself is more objectively verifiable, and so less
arbitrarily deniable.
NOTES
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
2. Debian Installer Bookworm Alpha 2 release
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/02/msg00005.html
--
Ce qui est important est rarement urgent
et ce qui est urgent est rarement important
-- Dwight David Eisenhower
