On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 07:57:37PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Sun, 19 May 2002, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > > On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 04:08:13PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > As I see it, Debian GNU/Hurd can, at most, be a system that helps people > > > install, test, hack on, and play with, the Hurd as it is now. > > > > It indeed helps us with that. But we want it to make a real operating > > system for general use. > > You want to make the GNU system a real operating system for general > use. Debian already is a real operating system for general use, so you > can't *make* it that way. Debian is a distribution. > > > It can never > > > fulfill RMS' dream he wrote down in the GNU Manifesto; consider the fact > > > that Debian and GNU define 'Free Software' in a different way. > > > > Not really. > > Uhh, yes. GNU defines 'Free Software' by defining what 'Freedom' means, > and how that applies to Software. Debian defines 'Free Software' by a list > of properties a license should have; if they all apply, the software can > be called 'Free' according to Debian. The DFSG are just guidelines, not definitions. > > The only incompatible I know of is the atistic > > license. > > Think FDL. You said "free software". > > A very big part of Debian is implementing the GNU Coding Standards > > upstream. Why change it in Debian? > > One could also argue that a very big part of Debian implements the FHS > upstream. This argument is bogus. That would be compatible, the other way around isn't. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org IRC ID: jeroen@openprojects GNU supporter - http://www.gnu.org
Attachment:
pgpJQJ67g7bt3.pgp
Description: PGP signature