On 2/21/06, Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/21/06, Margarita Manterola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/20/06, Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a specific counter example, consider
http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
which is a project porting a
On 2/27/06, Margarita Manterola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/21/06, Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1 open source windows driver available (can be used with ndiswrapper)
Well, I couldn't find any trace of 1 ever happening. If it ever
happened, then it's ok. But as far as I know, the
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 03:52:29AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 12:43:39PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
What makes 'running free windows drivers for stuff' so much more
unrealistic than 'running free windows software for stuff'? Especially
seen as how no Windows
On 21 Feb 2006, Steve Langasek verbalised:
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 10:40:06AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:36:13PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved
to contrib.
While I would personally rather see the
On 2/20/06, Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a specific counter example, consider
http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
which is a project porting a windows driver to linux. This port
appears to be possible because the windows driver was made
available under a free
On 2/21/06, Margarita Manterola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/20/06, Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a specific counter example, consider
http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
which is a project porting a windows driver to linux. This port
appears to be possible
Raul Miller writes (Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main):
It looks to me as if the sequence of events was:
1 open source windows driver available (can be used with ndiswrapper)
2 someone ports windows driver to linux
3 linux driver available
These events are sequential, and event 3 does
On 2/21/06, Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Raul Miller writes (Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main):
It looks to me as if the sequence of events was:
1 open source windows driver available (can be used with ndiswrapper)
2 someone ports windows driver to linux
3 linux driver available
Raul Miller writes (Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main):
On 2/21/06, Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Was the open source windows driver ever available as a Debian
package ? It seems clear to me that anything which requires you to
install non-Debian stuff on your machine belongs
* Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] [060219 11:34]:
Nevertheless, if you think abiword and openoffice.org should be moved then
go
for it. Just don't use them as excuse to turn warez wrappers into generic
driver interfaces.
No excuses are needed, the definition of contrib is enough and
reopen 353278
reassign 353278 tech-ctte
reopen 353277
reassign 353277 tech-ctte
merge 353278 353277
thanks
Hi,
I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved to contrib.
My reasons are:
- The sole purpose of these packages is allowing the use of non-free Windows
On Feb 20, Bernhard R. Link [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
emulators, game engines and other stuff not usefull without something to
act on has always been placed in contrib when there was no free stuff
available
for them. History has always been: Write something free for it, then
it is main; if
On 2/20/06, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved to contrib.
This proposal is clear enough.
My reasons are:
- The sole purpose of these packages is allowing the use of non-free Windows
drivers.
- There are no free
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 11:11:32AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
(possibly better) ways to do the same.
On 2/20/06, Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
AFAICS, this would come under the overrule a developer (3:1 majority)
power.
That's a good point.
While there are technical issues here (such as: what software does ndiswrapper
depend on?), they are not the deciding issues. The core
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:36:13PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved to contrib.
ndiswrapper is a program to allow users to load Windows drivers for their
hardware and use them on Linux. The drivers are executed on the main CPU;
there
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 10:40:06AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:36:13PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved to
contrib.
ndiswrapper is a program to allow users to load Windows drivers for their
hardware
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 11:34 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Feb 19, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nevertheless, if you think abiword and openoffice.org should be moved then
go
for it. Just don't use them as excuse to turn warez wrappers into generic
driver interfaces.
No
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
(possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
the package should stay in main.
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 11:11:32AM +0100, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
(possibly better)
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:17:11PM +, Brett Parker wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
(possibly better) ways to do the same.
On Feb 19, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nevertheless, if you think abiword and openoffice.org should be moved then go
for it. Just don't use them as excuse to turn warez wrappers into generic
driver interfaces.
No excuses are needed, the definition of contrib is enough and
Le dimanche 19 février 2006 à 11:22 +0100, Mike Hommey a écrit :
You're turning this into non-sense. An NDIS wrapper is OBVIOUSLY for the
exclussive purpose of using non-free Windows drivers. It is so obvious
because nobody has written [1] free GPLed NDIS drivers. EVER. It has
nothing
On Feb 19, Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Indeed. It has with the fact there is no reasonable use of ndiswrapper
that doesn't imply installing (and running) non-free software on the
host machine. The key here is reasonable. This is a practical case,
not something to build up
Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
(possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
the package should stay in main.
But does the
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 01:42:38PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 12:49:48PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:40:26AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
I'll ask again: Is the purpose of ndiswrapper running non-free
drivers? If it isn't, show me a
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 08:14:38PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
Then please work to revise [Removed false premise fallacy]
Last time your argument was that free NDIS drivers exist, so the situation is
analogous to wine. Nobody bothered to check, but it turns out that only one
free driver
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:40:26AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
I'll ask again: Is the purpose of ndiswrapper running non-free drivers? If
it
isn't, show me a free, non-toy, non-POC driver that would prove otherwise.
Does the lack of a free driver which can be used with ndiswrapper mean
that
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 12:49:48PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:40:26AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
I'll ask again: Is the purpose of ndiswrapper running non-free drivers?
If it
isn't, show me a free, non-toy, non-POC driver that would prove otherwise.
Does
Robert Millan writes:
Policy:
2.2.2 The contrib section
[...]
Examples of packages which would be included in contrib are:
Here's the part that you left out:
* free packages which require contrib, non-free packages or packages
which are not in our archive at all for compilation or
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 08:46:53AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
But nasm requires such assembly for useful execution!
Dude, you're on crack. First, there's apparently free software in
main that you can compile with nasm to your heart's content, namely
crystalspace, drip, e3, effectv, extipl,
Anthony Towns writes:
But even if that weren't the case, nasm is an assembler -- it doesn't
rely on assembler code to do anything useful, its purpose is to translate
assembler code. ndiswrapper isn't a driver compiler, it's a wrapper to
allow existing drivers to run on Linux.
This apparently
Le samedi 18 février 2006 à 09:59 -0500, Michael Poole a écrit :
Anthony Towns writes:
But even if that weren't the case, nasm is an assembler -- it doesn't
rely on assembler code to do anything useful, its purpose is to translate
assembler code. ndiswrapper isn't a driver compiler, it's
Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 12:40:10PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
[...]
First, I couldn't find any reference to a GPLed NDIS driver in
ndiswrapper's
website, like Michael Poole asserts:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:59:07AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
Anthony Towns writes:
But even if that weren't the case, nasm is an assembler -- it doesn't
rely on assembler code to do anything useful, its purpose is to translate
assembler code. ndiswrapper isn't a driver compiler, it's a
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
I see. From http://cipe-win32.sourceforge.net/ :
CIPE-Win32 is a port of Olaf Titz's CIPE package from Linux to Windows
NT.
I think this is the cipe-source package in debian. If this driver is
already
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
(possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
the package should stay in main.
But does the cipe-source build or ship the windows driver for
Anthony Towns writes:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:59:07AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
Anthony Towns writes:
But even if that weren't the case, nasm is an assembler -- it doesn't
rely on assembler code to do anything useful, its purpose is to translate
assembler code. ndiswrapper isn't
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
(possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
the package should stay in main.
Brett Parker writes:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:36:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:04:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
The availability to do this is enough even if there are other
(possibly better) ways to do the same. One free driver _in_ Debian and
the
Le samedi 18 février 2006 à 17:36 +0100, Mike Hommey a écrit :
Which means you need some software (even if it is free) from outside
Debian for ndiswraper. That makes it contrib imho.
Are there any free MSWord files in main ? No ? Then please move
antiword and similar tools to contrib.
If
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 07:49:10AM -0800, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 11:22 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
Package: ndiswrapper
Severity: serious
This package should be in contrib, not main.
We've had this discussion. We're not having it again. Check the
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
[...]
First, I couldn't find any reference to a GPLed NDIS driver in ndiswrapper's
website, like Michael Poole asserts:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/01/msg00381.html
I assume he was talking about the CIPE driver; it's
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 12:40:10PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
[...]
First, I couldn't find any reference to a GPLed NDIS driver in
ndiswrapper's
website, like Michael Poole asserts:
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 23:48 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 12:40:10PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
[...]
First, I couldn't find any reference to a GPLed NDIS driver in
ndiswrapper's
website, like
On Feb 17, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see. From http://cipe-win32.sourceforge.net/ :
CIPE-Win32 is a port of Olaf Titz's CIPE package from Linux to Windows NT.
I think this is the cipe-source package in debian. If this driver is already
available, there's no much point
Robert Millan writes:
I see. From http://cipe-win32.sourceforge.net/ :
CIPE-Win32 is a port of Olaf Titz's CIPE package from Linux to Windows NT.
I think this is the cipe-source package in debian. If this driver is already
available, there's no much point in using it via ndiswrapper.
47 matches
Mail list logo
