On 2/27/06, Margarita Manterola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/21/06, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 1 "open source" windows driver available (can be used with ndiswrapper)
> Well, I couldn't find any trace of "1" ever happening. If it ever
> happened, then it's ok. But as far as
On 2/21/06, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/21/06, Margarita Manterola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 2/20/06, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > As a specific counter example, consider
> > > http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
> > > which is a project
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 03:52:29AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 12:43:39PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > What makes 'running free windows drivers for stuff' so much more
> > unrealistic than 'running free windows software for stuff'? Especially
> > seen as how no Windo
Raul Miller writes ("Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main"):
> On 2/21/06, Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Was the open source windows driver ever available as a Debian
> > package ? It seems clear to me that anything which requires you to
> > ins
On 2/21/06, Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Raul Miller writes ("Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main"):
> > It looks to me as if the sequence of events was:
> >
> > 1 "open source" windows driver available (can be used with ndiswrapper)
> >
Raul Miller writes ("Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main"):
> It looks to me as if the sequence of events was:
>
> 1 "open source" windows driver available (can be used with ndiswrapper)
> 2 someone ports windows driver to linux
> 3 linux driver available
>
>
On 2/21/06, Margarita Manterola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/20/06, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As a specific counter example, consider
> > http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
> > which is a project porting a windows driver to linux. This port
> > appears to
On 2/20/06, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As a specific counter example, consider
> http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
> which is a project porting a windows driver to linux. This port
> appears to be possible because the windows driver was made
> available under a
On 21 Feb 2006, Steve Langasek verbalised:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 10:40:06AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:36:13PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
>>> I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved
>>> to contrib.
>> While I would personally rather se
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 10:40:06AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:36:13PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved to
> > contrib.
> ndiswrapper is a program to allow users to load Windows drivers for their
> hard
On 2/20/06, Anthony Towns wrote:
> AFAICS, this would come under the "overrule a developer (3:1 majority)"
> power.
That's a good point.
While there are technical issues here (such as: "what software does ndiswrapper
depend on?"), they are not the deciding issues. The core issues are more like
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:36:13PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved to contrib.
ndiswrapper is a program to allow users to load Windows drivers for their
hardware and use them on Linux. The drivers are executed on the main CPU;
there
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 11:11:32AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
> > > The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
> > > (possibly better) ways to do the
On 2/20/06, Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved to contrib.
This proposal is clear enough.
> My reasons are:
>
> - The sole purpose of these packages is allowing the use of non-free Windows
> drivers.
>
> - There are
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 353278
Bug#353278: should be in contrib
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
> reassign 353278 tech-ctte
Bug#353278: should be in contrib
Bug reassigned from package `ndiswrapper-modules-i386' to `tech-ctte'.
> reopen 353277
Bug#353277: should
On Feb 20, "Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> emulators, game engines and other stuff not usefull without something to
> act on has always been placed in contrib when there was no free stuff
> available
> for them. History has always been: "Write something free for it, then
> it is
reopen 353278
reassign 353278 tech-ctte
reopen 353277
reassign 353277 tech-ctte
merge 353278 353277
thanks
Hi,
I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved to contrib.
My reasons are:
- The sole purpose of these packages is allowing the use of non-free Windows
drivers.
* Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060219 11:34]:
> > Nevertheless, if you think abiword and openoffice.org should be moved then
> > go
> > for it. Just don't use them as excuse to turn warez wrappers into "generic"
> > driver interfaces.
> No excuses are needed, the definition of contrib is eno
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 01:42:38PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 12:49:48PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:40:26AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > I'll ask again: Is the purpose of ndiswrapper running non-free
> > > drivers? If it isn't, sho
Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
>> The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
>> (possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
>> the package should stay in main.
>>
>> But does th
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 11:34 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Feb 19, Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Nevertheless, if you think abiword and openoffice.org should be moved then
> > go
> > for it. Just don't use them as excuse to turn warez wrappers into "generic"
> > driver interfac
On Feb 19, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Indeed. It has with the fact there is no reasonable use of ndiswrapper
> that doesn't imply installing (and running) non-free software on the
> host machine. The key here is "reasonable". This is a practical case,
> not something to build up
Le dimanche 19 février 2006 à 11:22 +0100, Mike Hommey a écrit :
> > You're turning this into non-sense. An NDIS wrapper is OBVIOUSLY for the
> > exclussive purpose of using non-free Windows drivers. It is so obvious
> > because nobody has written [1] free GPLed NDIS drivers. EVER. It has
> >
On Feb 19, Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nevertheless, if you think abiword and openoffice.org should be moved then go
> for it. Just don't use them as excuse to turn warez wrappers into "generic"
> driver interfaces.
No excuses are needed, the definition of contrib is enough and
ndi
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 11:11:32AM +0100, Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
> > > The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
> > > (possibly b
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:17:11PM +, Brett Parker wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
> > > The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
> > > (possibly better) ways to do the
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
> > The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
> > (possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
> > the package should stay in m
Le samedi 18 février 2006 à 17:36 +0100, Mike Hommey a écrit :
> > Which means you need some software (even if it is free) from outside
> > Debian for ndiswraper. That makes it contrib imho.
>
> Are there any free MSWord files in main ? No ? Then please move
> antiword and similar tools to contrib
Brett Parker writes:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
> > > The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
> > > (possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
>
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
> > The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
> > (possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
> > the package should stay in m
Anthony Towns writes:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:59:07AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> > Anthony Towns writes:
> > > But even if that weren't the case, nasm is an assembler -- it doesn't
> > > rely on assembler code to do anything useful, its purpose is to translate
> > > assembler code. ndiswra
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
> The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
> (possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
> the package should stay in main.
>
> But does the cipe-source build or ship the windows driver f
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > I see. From http://cipe-win32.sourceforge.net/ :
> > "CIPE-Win32 is a port of Olaf Titz's CIPE package from Linux to Windows
> > NT."
> > I think this is the cipe-source package in debian. If this driver is
> > already
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:59:07AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > But even if that weren't the case, nasm is an assembler -- it doesn't
> > rely on assembler code to do anything useful, its purpose is to translate
> > assembler code. ndiswrapper isn't a driver compiler, it'
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 12:40:10PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
>> On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
>> [...]
>> >
>> > First, I couldn't find any reference to a "GPLed NDIS driver" in
>> > ndiswrapper's
>> > website, like Michael
Le samedi 18 février 2006 à 09:59 -0500, Michael Poole a écrit :
> Anthony Towns writes:
>
> > But even if that weren't the case, nasm is an assembler -- it doesn't
> > rely on assembler code to do anything useful, its purpose is to translate
> > assembler code. ndiswrapper isn't a driver compiler
Anthony Towns writes:
> But even if that weren't the case, nasm is an assembler -- it doesn't
> rely on assembler code to do anything useful, its purpose is to translate
> assembler code. ndiswrapper isn't a driver compiler, it's a wrapper to
> allow existing drivers to run on Linux.
This apparen
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 08:46:53AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> But nasm requires such assembly for useful execution!
Dude, you're on crack. First, there's apparently free software in
main that you can compile with nasm to your heart's content, namely
crystalspace, drip, e3, effectv, extipl, fl
Robert Millan writes:
> Policy:
>
> "2.2.2 The contrib section
>
> [...]
> Examples of packages which would be included in contrib are:
>
Here's the part that you left out:
* free packages which require contrib, non-free packages or packages
which are not in our archive at all for compila
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 12:49:48PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:40:26AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > I'll ask again: Is the purpose of ndiswrapper running non-free drivers?
> > If it
> > isn't, show me a free, non-toy, non-POC driver that would prove otherwise.
>
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:40:26AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> I'll ask again: Is the purpose of ndiswrapper running non-free drivers? If
> it
> isn't, show me a free, non-toy, non-POC driver that would prove otherwise.
Does the lack of a free driver which can be used with ndiswrapper mean
th
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 08:14:38PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
>
> Then please work to revise [Removed false premise fallacy]
Last time your argument was that free NDIS drivers exist, so the situation is
analogous to wine. Nobody bothered to check, but it turns out that only one
free driver exis
Robert Millan writes:
> I see. From http://cipe-win32.sourceforge.net/ :
>
> "CIPE-Win32 is a port of Olaf Titz's CIPE package from Linux to Windows NT."
>
> I think this is the cipe-source package in debian. If this driver is already
> available, there's no much point in using it via ndiswr
On Feb 17, Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see. From http://cipe-win32.sourceforge.net/ :
>
> "CIPE-Win32 is a port of Olaf Titz's CIPE package from Linux to Windows NT."
>
> I think this is the cipe-source package in debian. If this driver is already
> available, there's no muc
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 23:48 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 12:40:10PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > [...]
> > >
> > > First, I couldn't find any reference to a "GPLed NDIS driver" in
> > > ndiswrapper's
> > > we
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 12:40:10PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > First, I couldn't find any reference to a "GPLed NDIS driver" in
> > ndiswrapper's
> > website, like Michael Poole asserts:
> >
> > http://lists.debian.org/
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
[...]
>
> First, I couldn't find any reference to a "GPLed NDIS driver" in ndiswrapper's
> website, like Michael Poole asserts:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/01/msg00381.html
>
I assume he was talking about the CIPE drive
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 07:49:10AM -0800, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 11:22 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Package: ndiswrapper
> > Severity: serious
> >
> > This package should be in contrib, not main.
>
>
> We've had this discussion. We're not having it again.
48 matches
Mail list logo
