Enabled repositories in default install
ogra at ubuntu.com
Sun Jun 26 16:20:50 CDT 2005
Am Montag, den 27.06.2005, 06:42 +1000 schrieb John Skaller:
> Anyhow the Debian names make more sense to me, and it seems
> silly to change them for Ubuntu, since the categorisation concept
> is the same.
but the categories and their contents are completely different and
ubuntu simply isnt debian, even if it inherits a lot of it.
> I mean really, 'universe' isn't enough so we have
> to go to 'multiverse' .. why not Galactic Empire? :)
its just a cooler name for universe-nonfree-and-suspicious-licensed
> I was really confused by 'restricted' too, what the heck?
> Hey, I'm over 18! Show me that R-rated software now!!
restricted are the pieces that are not allowed to be distributed in
debian main by the debian policy but are distributed in ubuntu
> The thing is, 'restricted' is exactly the opposite:
> its actually the supported non-base applications,
> which one should feel most free to install ..
> one should feel less restricted about it than the
> unrestricted universe about which one should tremble
> and backup before installations .. :)
who told you that ?
there are at least 20 MOTUs spending a lot (if not all) of their spare
time for you to make this packages work right and to give you support
for them, why do you make such offending statements here and just ignore
their work ?
can you imagine how much work it is to care for 16000 packages with only
~20 people ?
universe is _not_ unsupported !
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20050626/6ec0bacd/attachment.pgp
More information about the ubuntu-devel