> thus creating a conflict with the license that effectively prohibits
changes that are not "substantial"
This is my understanding as well.
> Isn't everything in Trisquel's repository required to be "buildable" with
only free software?
Yes, this is a problem too.
> [VRMS] is useless on
"Isn't everything in Trisquel's repository required to be "buildable" with
only free software?"
Yes. This should be reported https://trisquel.info/en/project/issues and an
email to report-nonf...@fsf.org so the OP can get a GNU Buck:
https://www.gnu.org/help/gnu-bucks.en.html
> I do not know why fonts-ubuntu and fonts-ubuntu-console are in the non-free
section of Debian.
Apparently when packaging these fonts Debian concluded that the Ubuntu Font
License is not compatible with the Debian Free Software Guidelines. The
packaging discussion is [here][1], and the
Hello,
I installed the vrms package directly from debian, since trisquel didn't have
it in the archives. This package checks for other non-free packages. I'm not
sure if it is effective or not. The point is that it has 4 non-free packages
in trisquel 9. That's the output:
Non-free
