On Sun, Apr 18, 2004 at 09:20:00AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > Otherwise, it could simply be a configuration list that is parsed by the > > device, or a memory initialization image, or a dispatch table, or > > something similar, and rejecting such things on the basis that they are > > *suspected* to be software without source seems to be counterproductive > > There is no difference between the two, but this is getting very > off-topic
Its on-topic because the OP's work was generated specifically from the discussion on the Debian lists that I referenced. I still don't see where the boundary is drawn between data (which requires no source to be DFSG-free) and embedded executable code (which requires source to be DFSG-free). It seems that the interpretation is arbitrary depending on what 'feels' right in a particular case. I've no contest with people doing work to make things more flexible, but in this case the OP's work is being done because the unidentified matter is to be removed from the distribution, due to its suspected code-without-source nature. Why not do this work simply as a precursor to the event where someone identifies this binary blob as code-without-source in the future, and defer the actual removal to that future date if it ever arrives? -- Ryan Underwood, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
