-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I'd really like it if non-free packages (especially those being
referred to from packages in main) would be clearer on *what exactly*
they provide (and thus, what exactly one loses if they're no
installed).
For example, tetex-nonfree... I can only guess from the sparse
description, and I'm not even a TeX newbie... for someone who's at "I
know I need TeX, but I don't know what everything's for", this is an
even harder call to make.
So... tetex-nonfree (and other similar packages) should clearly say
(even if the description grows somewhat): If you don't install this,
you can't do the following. (Or rather: If you install this, you'll
be able to do this...)
Currently, the only option one has is not to install such a package
and then wait for whatever to break. Which is not a good solution.
Anyway,
Bye, J
PS: I'd make a policy proposal outta this... if I were a developer.
But I can still hope someone would adopt it...
PPS: I am *not* against non-free in general... I'd only hope the
choices a user has would be moe obvious...
- --
Jürgen A. Erhard eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: (GERMANY) 0721 27326
My WebHome: http://members.tripod.com/~Juergen_Erhard
Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org)
Win32 has many known work arounds. For example, Linux.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.7a (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iEYEARECAAYFAjdkPzcACgkQN0B+CS56qs2eVwCeIGPmO5kmMl4VW4kGhDp43/Ae
CPUAnR1Or2O5bsFlBb3gLjwe6JD0mZ7e
=lV97
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
