* Bernhard R. Link: > * Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [051025 13:51]: >> * Steve Langasek: >> >> > Frank Lichtenheld has already posted an announcement[4] detailing the >> > release team's plans for the question of non-DFSG documentation in main. >> >> Just to clarify, is technical documentation that is only available in >> non-editable formats (e.g. Postscript files) > > Little nitpick and petition: Please write "generated Postscript files" > in such examples, as postscript files can be perfectly editable and > only the existance of easier languages causes the vast majority of > postscript files being generated non-editable forms. (As is assembler > files currently, or as C source code would be if almost everyone switched > to some other language with a compiler generating C code as intermediate > format.)
On systems without digital restrictions managemet without mandatory enforcement [1], it goes without saying that you can change bytes as you like, but it is hardly the preferred way of implementing modifications. Is it really controversial that these problems are bugs? I assumed that only the RC status could be subject to debate. 1. Both the kernel and GCC include DRM, but without mandatory enforcement. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]