Re: freedomization task list [was: Re: Dangerous precedent being set - possible serious violation of the GPL]
John Galt <galt@inconnu.isu.edu> writes:
> > > Until that happens, I stand by the fact that xemacsXX depends on X in all
> > > extant cases.
> >
> > Being linked with a library is FAR different that requiring the X
> > Window System (X). The difference is not hard to notice and I am
> > surprised that you have missed it.
>
> If you tell me how to find out if package foo requires X save by the
> xlib6g dependency, I'll gladly concede the point. Good luck trying...
Perhaps -- shock horror -- you might actually *boggle* READ THE
DOCUMENTATION?!
> > Furthermore, your logic quoted below is extremely faulty; xterm has no
> > non-X mode; XEmacs does. Oops, looks like you have a flaw. Next
> > thing I know you'll be claiming mc depends on GNOME and ls on Linux!
>
> Furthermore nothing. The only fault of logic here is your failure to
> address all bases for the analogy and your building a strawman.
You are saying "A is B, A is C; Z is B; therefore, Z is C". (Where A
is xterm, B is "depends on xlib6g", C is "depends on X", and Z is
"XEmacs".)
Notice the flaw in your logic yet? It should be obvious.
As another example. Cars have windows. Cars need sparkplugs. Houses
have windows. Therefore, houses need sparkplugs.
> > Note that even though it is linked with an X library, it is still
> > possible for it to ignore such.
>
> Not when you're installing it. The actual execution is irrelevant--you
> can't even install xemacs without X, and installation is just a bit higher
You can, and I have. Please stop spouting these lies until you have
actually tried it.
> up in the tree than execution: you can install without execution, but you
> can't execute without installing.
--
John Goerzen Linux, Unix consulting & programming jgoerzen@complete.org |
Developer, Debian GNU/Linux (Free powerful OS upgrade) www.debian.org |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
via Remote
Reply to: