Fedor Zuev said: > On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, David Starner wrote: >>Fedor Zuev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >>> It almost certainly affect the normal use of program and >>> will be unacceptable because of this, not because of mere existence >>> of such code. > >>How does ls --hangman bringing up a hangman program affect the >>normal use of the program more then a large manifesto affect the >>normal use of the manual? > > 1) It should be compilable with any compiler used for > compilation of ls.
If this is a reason to reject the invariant --hangman option for ls as non-free, then this is a reason to reject invariant (untranslatable) sections of documents as non-free. --Joe
