Re: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-15 Thread Michael Meskes
Lars Wirzenius writes: > > Can't we find a way to keep programs like this an official part? > > We can say that contrib is an official part of Debian. And non-free as well. > They have different support policies, but that's true wherever they are. > I don't really see a need for a change here, but

Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-15 Thread Lars Wirzenius
Michael Meskes: > > XForms is not free (no source). Anything that uses XForms is not free, > > because you can't compile it without XFree. > > Okay. Thus it has to go into contrib. Right? Yes. I think this is current policy, but I'm too lazy to check. (I just like to rant on this issue. Facts are

Re: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-14 Thread Ian Jackson
Frank Neumann writes ("Re: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'"): ... > So I'd say: Both XForms and LyX go into non-free. Compiling/linking LyX > statically doesn't change this point, IMHO. LyX and the XForms binary do not need to go into non-free because AFAI

Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-14 Thread Michael Meskes
Lars Wirzenius writes: > I guess I'm repeating myself, but oh well. In my opinion, the main Debian > distribution (i.e., not including non-free or contrib) should consist only > of free software, where the definition of free includes the requirement > that source code is available and that the prog

Re: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-13 Thread Lars Wirzenius
Michael Meskes: > I'd like to ask the other developers what they think. I guess I'm repeating myself, but oh well. In my opinion, the main Debian distribution (i.e., not including non-free or contrib) should consist only of free software, where the definition of free includes the requirement that

Re: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-13 Thread Mr Stuart Lamble
Michael Meskes wrote: > Ian Jackson writes: > > No, because packages which depend on contrib packages must go in > > contrib too. > > Hmm, that wasn't what was said a while ago when we moved xforms. > > I'd like to ask the other developers what they think. While I see th elogic > behind your appr

Re: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-13 Thread Frank Neumann
Hi, Michael Meskes wrote: > I'd like to ask the other developers what they think. While I see th elogic > behind your approach I still think LyX should be an official part of Debian. > > What happens if I recompile it statically? Would it go into the standard > tree then? Being a Debian/m68k us

Re: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-13 Thread Fernando
On Mon, 12 Aug 1996, Michael Meskes wrote: > I'd like to ask the other developers what they think. While I see th elogic > behind your approach I still think LyX should be an official part of Debian. Me too. However, I think that the way to accomplish that is to persuade the XForms authors to r

Re: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-12 Thread Michael Meskes
Ian Jackson writes: > No, because packages which depend on contrib packages must go in > contrib too. Hmm, that wasn't what was said a while ago when we moved xforms. I'd like to ask the other developers what they think. While I see th elogic behind your approach I still think LyX should be an of

Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-09 Thread Lars Wirzenius
> Subject: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib' > Package: lyx, ftp.debian.org I assume that the subject is wrong? (Actually, I know it is, but I'm not sure if it matters for the bug system.) -- Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.iki.fi/liw/> Please don&

Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

1996-08-09 Thread Ian Jackson
Package: lyx, ftp.debian.org Version: 0.9.28-1 This package depends on a non-free package (xforms). It should be in contrib, not in the distribution proper. Ian.