non-free vs. free packages

DodGeR DodGeR at
Tue Oct 18 16:43:43 UTC 2005

not that I count , I'm jsut a vastly inferior user ..

the way I see it it would be nice to have a distro based way of installing 
something i need/want PROPERLY.
i dont have the skill to find the right thing and install it properly.
so if lunar doesnt offer a module for it, then I cant use it.

while 90% of other lunar users might have the skill, u cleary are not 
attracting many new users by making things difficult for them.
i have enough time to play around with things in lunar, and i AM going to 
master this distro if it takes 50 years - this is NOT true for others.

jsit of my input; to make it easy for Lunar users it'd be nice to have 
'popular' apps installable with lin.
if u want to keep it difficult for ppl to switch to lunar then don't add 
support for popular apps in lunar.


ps. i love the idea of things that need input working differently to those 
not needing user input. nothing pisses me off more then having to provide 
answers to things i know nothing about, or kicking something off to find it 
sitting there 2 hours later waiting for input.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Patrik Gräser" <hittis at>
To: "Lunar general discussion list" <lunar at>
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: non-free vs. free packages

> Hi.
> This is written with (IMHO) inserted everywhere. I'm not trying to force
> my view on anyone. I have enjoyed working with, and using, Lunar-linux and
> part of that is that we don't have religious wars about licensing matters
> (except for the odd irc-fight ;) . I like to talk about "how to make the
> Lunar experience better for users?" not "how do we force our views on our
> users?"
> First of. Installing non-free software is not the issue. Neither is the
> package-maintanence systems ability to handle non-free software. The issue
> is (AFAICS) wether or not to include access to non-free and closed source
> software through modules in moonbase.
> Myself, I would say "No non-free" but... Drop all non-free and binary from
> moonbase. This would mean that essential hardware support gets lost and it
> would mean that software containing firmware can't be used either (or
> would it?)...
> This sounds ridiculous.
> Splitting non-free from the moonbase has been mentioned previously but (If
> I remember correctly) in the context of a subdirectory/section in
> moonbase.
> I would go even further and split the current moonbase into multiple
> modulecollections(the names are fictitious and used only for simplicity):
> Moonbase. FOSS software with sources freely available.
> Asteroid. Free-to-use software with binary-only or sources available.
> Comet. Proprietary non-free software or software that needs user
> interaction to download.
> Houston. Modules upp for testing (Just read Zbigniews mail, thanks...)
> before inclusion in "official" collections.
> If the lunar tools were rewritten to support multiple modulecollections
> then I think it would simplify for enterprises to support their own
> collections.
> The available collections could be stored in a file (collections.conf in
> the form "<collection-name>\t<collection-URL>\t<collection-description>
> perhaps) and it would then be trivial to add/remove collections to Lunar.
> Perhaps a switch for lin/lvu could be used (-mc <collection>)?
> I have been pondering how to support Ciscos VPN-client in Lunar and with
> the above I could do it.
> This would require a lot of work (I think) but I believe it would simplify
> for the future. But what to do in the interim?
> Well... I don't realy know. We have non-free software in Moonbase right
> now... Perhaps a section called non-free that later gets moved to a new
> collection?
> Am I barking up the wrong tree (or perhaps no tree at all)? Perhaps...
> Just my two cents worth :)
> Patrik G.
> _______________________________________________
> Lunar mailing list
> Lunar at

More information about the Lunar mailing list