Andrew Wigglesworth wrote: > > the same answer probably also applies to gnupg-doc since vrms is not > very accurate.
No. vrms was specifically designed for Debian, as a tool to check the non-free packages that Debian distributes. It is pointless to have vrms in gNewSense, because gNewSense's sole purpose is to be entirely free GNU/Linux distribution. The reason why vrms spits such information for GFDL-licensed documentation and other packages that fail DFSG and are in Debian's non-free section (but are considered free by the GNU Project and RMS) is that vrms is developed for Debian, and the maintainer(s) try to follow the Debian Policy and practices (which is understandable). I only object for the package name, it has to be changed to vdfsg or something similar. This is outrageous: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ vrms Non-free packages installed on patilan autoconf-doc automatic configure script builder documentation automake1.9-doc A tool for generating GNU Standards-compliant Makefile emacs21-common-non-dfsg GNU Emacs shared, architecture independent, non-DFSG i gnu-standards GNU coding and package maintenance standards make-doc Documentation for the GNU version of the "make" utilit tar-doc documentation for the tar package Reason: GFDL with invariant cover texts texinfo-doc-nonfree texinfo and info documentation that is non-free 7 non-free packages, 0.2% of 3215 installed packages. _______________________________________________ gNewSense-users mailing list gNewSensefirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users