[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 1L?
From: |
tomas |
Subject: |
Re: 1L? |
Date: |
Fri, 8 Feb 2019 10:27:17 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 08:14:44PM +1100, Van L wrote:
> Debian can be a pain in the arse for getting Emacs's documentation
> because of purist's polemical interpretation of freedom is my
> understanding.
Understanding things is usually better than resorting to -- uh --
polemics oneself. It is true that the GNU Free Documentation
License (in its unrestricted form) is incompatible with the
Debian Free Software Guidelines. This is unfortunate, but such
messups are bound to happen from time to time. Each side has its
valid points.
That said, the Emacs docs /are/ available for Debianites, under
the non-free section. Where's the problem?
> The kernel lead programmer doesn't use Debian according
> to YT headlines.
Whatever YT is, I don't read its headlines ;-)
> On NetBSD the Emacs package is difficult, cross referencing to the C
> source code is too hard.
What do you mean by that?
Cheers
-- tomás
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Re: 1L?, (continued)
- Re: 1L?, Vladimir Sedach, 2019/02/08
- Message not available
- Re: 1L?, Emanuel Berg, 2019/02/08
- Re: 1L?, Van L, 2019/02/08
- Re: 1L?, Emanuel Berg, 2019/02/08
- Re: 1L?, Emanuel Berg, 2019/02/07
- Re: 1L?, Van L, 2019/02/08
- Re: 1L?,
tomas <=
- Re: 1L?, Emanuel Berg, 2019/02/08
- Re: 1L?, tomas, 2019/02/08
- Re: 1L?, Van L, 2019/02/10
- Re: 1L?, tomas, 2019/02/10
- Re: 1L?, Emanuel Berg, 2019/02/10
- Re: 1L?, Emanuel Berg, 2019/02/10
- Re: 1L?, Stefan Monnier, 2019/02/08
- Re: 1L?, Emanuel Berg, 2019/02/08
- Re: [OFFTOPIC] 1L?, Stefan Monnier, 2019/02/10
- Re: [OFFTOPIC] 1L?, Richard Melville, 2019/02/10