Manoj wrote: > Actually, I disagree, and, even worse, so does the common > definition of the phrase computer program: asking google about > define: computer program gives: > ,---- > | * A computer program is a set of statements or instructions to be > | used directly or indirectly in a computer in order to bring > | about a certain result. > | > www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9710.html
But Debian has a tradition of ignoring the common definition of phrases. Have you tried asking google to define software, for example? I think the key distinction (as far as I'm concerned) is that Debian isn't producing a distribution for the microcontroller in my fibrechannel card, it's producing a distribution for my computer. In order to make my fibrechannel card work, it has to poke some bits in a documented way. Even if there happens to be an ARM onboard that card that's running a program, that ARM isn't running Debian. I second Steve's proposal (although I can't be bothered to go to the hassle of signing this message right now. If it becomes important to do so, I shall.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]