Re: Re: live cd
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 03:50:57PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 02:21:06PM +0000, Robert Millan wrote:
> > And as Richard said, Linux itself is not essential anymore. It is good, but
> > not essential. So if they choose the non-free way, too bad; but we have a
> > bunch other free kernels.
> Just because some developers use bitkeeper doesn't make Linux non-free.
No, but reliing on non-free software and actualy developing it have something
in common for me. I consider both part of the "non-free way".
> Just as RMS said that Linux is not essential anymore, the same is true
> for Linus' own tree. If you don't like Bitkeeper, don't pulll from it,
> use another tree. There are a couple around, one of them might be pure,
I don't think anyone is going to fork Linux, so there's a dependency after all.
> > egcs is dead.
> I got merged upstream, AFAIK.
Indeed.. it died with honor ;)
"[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the
thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he
gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work."
-- J.R.R.T, Ainulindale (Silmarillion)