Your message dated Mon, 4 Feb 2002 09:04:01 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#129315: patch
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 15 Jan 2002 05:20:16 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jan 14 23:20:16 2002
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from qbxpppdsl68.ptld.uswest.net (knghtbrd.dyn.dhs.org)
[63.224.226.68] (borked)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 16QM1A-0005Vd-00; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 23:20:16 -0600
Received: by knghtbrd.dyn.dhs.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 0877A6A92A; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 21:23:26 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 21:23:25 -0800
From: Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Lex Spoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: www.debian.org: s/commercial/proprietary/
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="tMbDGjvJuJijemkf"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i
X-Operating-System: Linux galen 2.4.16
X-No-Junk-Mail: Spam will solicit a hostile reaction, at the very least.
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--tMbDGjvJuJijemkf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Package: www.debian.org
Version: N/A; reported 2002-01-14
Severity: normal
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 04:16:30PM -0400, Lex Spoon wrote:
> Debian *does* support non-free software -- users are simply supposed to
> read the licenses before they install it. Here's a statement from
> http://www.debian.org/intro/about:
>=20
> "Although Debian believes in free software, there are cases where people
> want or need to put commercial software on their machine. Whenever
> possible Debian will support this. There are even a growing number of
> packages whose sole job is to install commercial software into a Debian
> system."
Er, s/commercial/proprietary/ please. Not all commercial software is
proprietary and not all proprietary software is commercial. Debian's
interests are not at all served by confusing this issue.
--=20
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If this sig were funny...
=20
Basically, I want people to know that when they use binary-only modules,
it's THEIR problem. I want people to know that in their bones, and I
want it shouted out from the rooftops. I want people to wake up in a
cold sweat every once in a while if they use binary-only modules.
-- Linus Torvalds
--tMbDGjvJuJijemkf
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: 1024D/DCF9DAB3 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3
iEYEARECAAYFAjxDvM0ACgkQj/fXo9z52rN9vgCfWiLCPkCQwWWM5AUTA/vLs8Cf
7CUAoITex9adUsE2z6Cy1Y5hp0nPX5v+
=MKE7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--tMbDGjvJuJijemkf--
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 129315-done) by bugs.debian.org; 4 Feb 2002 17:03:08 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Feb 04 11:03:08 2002
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from svfulraptor1.beckman.com (catalonia) [134.217.237.30]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 16XmWJ-00057G-00; Mon, 04 Feb 2002 11:03:07 -0600
Received: from kraai by catalonia with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
id 16XmXB-0000B3-00
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 04 Feb 2002 09:04:01 -0800
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 09:04:01 -0800
From: Matt Kraai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#129315: patch
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5vNYLRcllDrimb99"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i
Sender: Matt Kraai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--5vNYLRcllDrimb99
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 09:35:33PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 01:28:38PM -0800, Matt Kraai wrote:
> > Given GNU's Categories of Free and Non-Free Software[1], it seems
> > best to replace `commercial' with `non-free' rather than
> > `proprietary', as the latter does not include semi-free software
> > (i.e., software which is free for non-profits). The following
> > patch does so. OK to apply?
>=20
> > -More and more people are looking for ways to avoid the inflated price =
of commercial
> > +More and more people are looking for ways to avoid the inflated price =
of
> > software.
>=20
> > <P>Although Debian believes in free software, there are cases where pe=
ople want or need to
> > -put commercial software on their machine. Whenever possible Debian wil=
l support this.
> > -There are even a growing number of packages whose sole job is to insta=
ll commercial software
> > +put non-free software on their machine. Whenever possible Debian will =
support this.
> > +There are even a growing number of packages whose sole job is to insta=
ll non-free software
> > into a Debian system.
>=20
> > <P>There are a few companies that make support difficult by not releas=
ing specifications
> > -for their hardware. Even if you have a commercial driver, you can run =
into
> > +for their hardware. Even if you have a non-free driver, you can run in=
to
>=20
> Apply it already :)
OK.
Matt
--5vNYLRcllDrimb99
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE8Xr8BfNdgYxVXvBARAiQpAKCnxdN77t3x/h4PuWpYJ+O0FaQz3ACfSAqq
R96nFoL09bCPIlBfOAMtMlg=
=9BST
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--5vNYLRcllDrimb99--
