On Tuesday 30 October 2012 09:30, andre999 wrote: > > The problem of including nonfree spftware in tainted, is that it no longer > > is a Free software repo in countries that don't accept software patents. > > So how is that a problem ?
I am one of those that have core and tainted activated, but not nonfree. I know that every available package urpm can find is Free and open source software. If we start to include nonfree packages in tainted, one can no longer activate tainted and be sure that every package available for instalation is Free software. > Would it help if a user could set a configuration to automatically > control the installation of non-free packages. > Something like "never", "confirm each time", or "always", similar to > what has been proposed for isos ? If it also works with urpm in the terminal, yes it's a help. I never use the graphical package management tools to install anything, unless I'm showing a user how to use the system. The only time I open the graphical package manager, is to browse through the categories just to see what's there. Sometimes i find cool games this way. The «never» option should work with the terminal tools like urpmq and urpmf. Meaning, if one choose to configure it to ignore nonfree packages, it should also not show up in searches. Which is one of the benefits of having separate repos. > Don't forget that packages in the tainted repo have to be downloaded > from the net, unlike packages in core or nonfree, which could be on an > iso. That depends. I never install from anything else but a network install. Mainly because i have access to much more software in one go. In the cases I install from a DVD iso it is on behalf of another user, and I usually add a repo anyway. In the past when I installed from a DVD on my own systems, I always added my local repo mirror. (urpmi.addmedia --distrib blahblah) > So having an additional control, and using the "never" option > would eliminate any chance of installing a non-free package from tainted. As would a new repo. :-)= > Wouldn't that work for you ? Yes, for me that would work, but this is not my point. :-)= I'm not making noice because it's an inconvenience to Me, but because if we do this we are thowing out our long standing tradition of separating Free software from Nonfree software. -- Johnny A. Solbu PGP key ID: 0xFA687324
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
