On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 01:37:31PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > On 2004-03-08 13:20:56 +0000 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >>[...] I don't really care about negative > >>effects on non-free software in general in this case. I support the > >>Suffield drop GR to improve Debian, not to harm non-free. > >You don't care about it, or you willingly close your eyes to it, in > >order to achieve the short term goal of having debian no more > >distribute > >the non-free section ? > > Yes, obviously. > > >>I want a proliferation of third-party free packages for debian. > >>Third party > >>non-free (like j2* packages) already exist and I doubt they would > >>grow as > >>quickly as free ones. > >What about binary-only hardware drivers ? > > They are drivers for hardware which have the bug of not being free > software, but I think you knew that already.
Yeah, and what do you plan to do to help fixing that ? And do you not think this is more important than some cosmetic change like the one that is proposed here. > >I wish you good luck to run > >advanced 3D graphics on powerpc hardware for example, especially on > >modern powerbooks. > > At present, I have no such need for that hardware. If you do, then I No, but i doubt you have access to the sourcecode of the bios you are running, and maybe it is even possible that your system is not void of non-free software. > think you should help to fix that bug, instead of writing to us about > how unfair it is that some of us don't want to support a bug of > someone else's driver any more. Yes, i do, but there is nothing i can do about it. I have many times lobbyed ATI and others to get access to the specs which would allow to write free drivers for those, but without success, and i have come to the conclusion that nothing short of the full foss community moving together, or at least a large part thereof, there will be nothing changing. Even worse, the situation today is worse than it was one year ago, and there is no chance of improvement. And having a separate non-free.org archive will only give these people reason, and be a reversal for the proponent of non-free software. And i don't hear anyone proposing to drop non-free doing anything against that, so two weight two measures ? IT is not ok for debian to distribute non-free, but it is ok for debian to rely on non-free binary only third parties, some we are even involved with, to run on said hardware. Friendly, Sven Luther
