[gNewSense-users] Would this script be useful to clean up Package files?

[Bake Timmons]

When I tried to install a package recently, a non-free package was
suggested to me.  This compelled me to write a script that filters out
from "Suggests:" and "Recommends:" lines any package that is not
a main or universe "Package:" or "Provides:".  Here is an excerpt from
a diff between the current gNS and my filtered version:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
831c831
< Suggests: apt-listchanges (>= 2.35), arj, cabextract, clamav,
clamav-daemon, cpio, dspam, lha, libauthen-sasl-perl, libdbi-perl (>=
1.43), libnet-ldap-perl (>= 1:0.32), lzop, nomarch, spamassassin (>=
3.1.0a), unrar, zoo
---
> Suggests: apt-listchanges (>= 2.35), arj, cabextract, clamav,
> clamav-daemon, cpio, dspam, libauthen-sasl-perl, libdbi-perl (>=
> 1.43), libnet-ldap-perl (>= 1:0.32), lzop, nomarch, spamassassin (>=
> 3.1.0a), zoo
928c928
< Suggests: apache | httpd, rmagic
---
> Suggests: httpd, rmagic
1600c1600
< Suggests: apparmor-docs, apparmor-modules-source
---
> Suggests: apparmor-docs
1929d1928
< Recommends: libcwidget0-dbg
1982c1981
< Suggests: khelpcenter, rar, unrar | unrar-free
---
> Suggests: khelpcenter, unrar-free
----------------------------------------------------------------------

What the deleted package names all have in common is that they have no
installation candidate.  Non-free packages are a strict subset of such
files.

Should I waste my time any more on this, or would something like this
be helpful in some way to anyone?  Personally, I would rather not know
about names of any non-free software.  More importantly, in general,
recommendations and suggestions of non-free software by anyone --
especially free software distributions -- are regularly condemned by
the FSF.  What do you think?