> > On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 08:27:47PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote: > > > Regardless of whether "works" and "components" mean the same as > > > "software," a computer's BIOS is a work, component and software. > > > Commercial IM and Microsoft Exchange servers are works and software > > > (and a component, but not clearly a component of the Debian system). > > > Packages in Debian clearly require those to function. Why not move > > > those dependent packages into contrib?
> Raul Miller writes: > > The bios dependency would affect every package in Debian, which would > > conflict with the part of the social contract which specifies "main". On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 10:10:47PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote: > Conflict in what way? It says "contrib" and "non-free" are for works > that do not conform to the DFSG. Packages in "contrib" conform to the > DFSG but depend on software that does not. If I interpret the SC's > statement about "contrib" and "non-free" so it agrees with Policy, I > see no conflict. Boot loaders currently in "main" conform to the DFSG > but depend on a BIOS, and there is no free BIOS in "main." You can't build those boot loaders on a system which hasn't been booted. If those boot loaders can be in main, then everything else that's in main can be in main. -- Raul
