It's part of unstable, so in principal, it can be used to build non-free installer
images.
For which archs is this used?
So even if partman-hfs is not used by default currently, the translations are currently used (translators work on it, if we add partman-hfs to the
l10n machinery), so I wonder if this introduces a license issue for the translation files?
(The po files contain the hint:
"This file is distributed under the same license as debian-installer.")
This shouldn't introduce any license problems as the partman-hfs package itself
is not affected by the license issue. It's just the hfsprogs package that is >using the problematic APSL license.
partman-hfs is just using the same license as debian-installer but it has to >live in the contrib section because it depends on a package from the non-free >section.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 486 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 148:02:14 |
Calls: | 9,659 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 13,708 |
Messages: | 6,168,027 |