There was a fantastic thread on the debian mailing list about pine. It's a great read (very dramatic).
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/1998/debian-user-199804/msg02794.htm l I guess the difference between lame and pine, as far as Debian is concerned, is that Pine simply can't be distributed as a modified binary. Lame, on the other hand, can't be distributed at all? http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/unable-to-package.en.html Debian definitely seems to be the distro for free-software idealists. Very little in the way of compromise. J > -----Original Message----- > From: Sach Jobb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 9:19 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Bits] linux mpeg encoders recommendations > > Okay, so a quick look into the ftpsite does show it's in the non-free > tree, and although there is nothing clearly explaining why, some poking > around the debian side indicates that they are not very happy with the > UofW over this, however i still find this very odd. > > Sources? > _______________________________________________ Bits mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sugoi.org/mailman/listinfo/bits
