Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 03, 2008, Josselin Mouette wrote: >> Le lundi 03 novembre 2008 à 10:12 +0100, Aurelien Jarno a écrit : >> > I haven't say that because they are not executed on by the CPU they are >> > more free. What I mean is that we have those discussions because they >> > are not executed on the main CPU, which makes them different than other >> > non-DFSG compliant software. Then some people consider that acceptable, >> > some other not. >> This case is very similar to non-free documentation, which is not >> executed on any CPU at all. It sounds bogus to split firmware in a >> specific archive and to not do it for documentation, data, etc. > > Which non-free documentation specifically?
e.g. PDF files with a DFSG-free license to them, the document source available as a LaTeX file, but LaTeX will typeset the document using a non-free font. Here, you can even modify the content as you like, you just can't reproduce the original PDF, and it would maybe be hard to make sure that the typesetting still looks nice and readable with a free replacement font with different metrics. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Debian Developer (TeXLive) ADFC Miltenberg B90/Grüne KV Miltenberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
