On 25-Mar-01, 02:45 (CST), Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Makes this policy cognizant of OpenMotif, which is now packaged for > Debian. Since OpenMotif is non-free, there is no actual policy change if > one treats OpenMotif the same as OSF/Motif. This proposal makes that > explicit. [and] > + <footnote> > + OSF/Motif and OpenMotif are collectively referred to as > + "Motif" in this policy document. > + </footnote> [and] > + but do so when compiled > + against Motif, then two versions of the package should be > + created; one linked statically against Motif and with > + <tt>-smotif</tt> appended to the package name, and one linked > + dynamically against Motif and with <tt>-dmotif</tt> appended to > + the package name.
If OpenMotif is in the distribution, why do packages need to provide a statically linked version? Why can't they go in contrib (DFSG) or non-free (otherwise) with a dependency on OpenMotif, just like other non-free library using software? Steve -- Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
