Re: Relation with non-existing packages

1999-01-12 Thread Remco Blaakmeer
On Tue, 12 Jan 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Santiago Vila wrote: > > Example: There is no pine.deb but a pinepgp package should be > > allowed to depend on it. > > Okay, that sounds reasonable. How about only doing this for packages in > main? Do you mean that a package in main cou

Re: Relation with non-existing packages

1999-01-12 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Santiago Vila wrote: > Example: There is no pine.deb but a pinepgp package should be > allowed to depend on it. Okay, that sounds reasonable. How about only doing this for packages in main? Wichert. -- == Thi

non-free packages should document/advise about alternatives

1999-01-12 Thread Kristoffer . Rose
Mark W. Eichin writes: > In a thread on -private about pdf viewers, it was noticed that people > were sometimes unaware of free alternatives to non-dfsg software; the > particular example was acroread (with gv and xpdf as free replacements.) > > This suggests an enhancement: non-free packages sho

Re: Relation with non-existing packages

1999-01-12 Thread Santiago Vila
On Sat, 9 Jan 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Richard Braakman wrote: > > I disagree with this proposal. Packages in contrib and non-free > > should be able to depend on packages that we can't or won't distribute > > for whatever reason. > > Why would we want to define relations withi

non-free packages should document/advise about alternatives

1999-01-12 Thread Mark W. Eichin
In a thread on -private about pdf viewers, it was noticed that people were sometimes unaware of free alternatives to non-dfsg software; the particular example was acroread (with gv and xpdf as free replacements.) This suggests an enhancement: non-free packages should perhaps include (formally? or