Force apt-get to ignore dependencies?

[Benjamin Scott]

On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Joshua Judson Rosen
<rozzin at geekspace.com> wrote:
>>   The Debian package downloads and runs an executable installer.
>> d-m.org offered a proper packaging of the installed files.
>
> I'd go for that, but... is that even *legal*? In the USA?

  IANAL, but I believe that's an open question.  It prolly doesn't
comply with the license document, but license documents do not have
the force of law (much to the dislike of software publishers
everywhere).  I haven't agreed to the terms of the license.  As far as
copyright goes, similar things have been considered "fair use" by US
courts in the past.  It would have to go to court to decide, and then
it would prolly depend on the mood of the judge and/or jury, and the
quality of the lawyers on both sides.

> ...  it extracts the .so from the tarball ...

  Okay, so it's ripping the files from Adobe's executable installer
kit, rather than running same.  All my individually enumerated
complaints still apply in full.

-- Ben