Re: Debian trademark [was: Debian GNU/w32, may ready to be started?]
On 3 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Dale Scheetz <email@example.com> writes:
> > On 3 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > Dale Scheetz <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > >
> > > > RMS approached Debian nearly insisting that the distro be called Debian
> > > > GNU/Linux because of the large component of GNU sofware in the distro. Why
> > > > would he have any different desire for a set of GNU packages delivered to
> > > > a non-Linux platform?
> > >
> > > Because that particular non-Linux platform is not a free software
> > > platform.
> > So, neither is Sun OS. GNU software runs just fine in that proprietary OS.
> Nobody calls it "GNU/SunOS".
And very few in this discussion have suggested GNU in this Debian port. At
least I haven't suggested it. (Yes, I have answered some remarks on the
It's called Debian GNU/Linux, which doesn't stop any of those packages
from bein used on the Sun OS.
> > According the the FSF, any distribution that uses the complete set of GNU
> > tools IS a GNU system, no matter what you want to call it.
> Um, no. You just don't understand the FSF's position. The FSF's
> position is that there is a specific operating system, called "GNU".
> There is this related thing, called "GNU/Linux", which is a variant of
> the GNU system in which the kernel is Linux.
I understand that this is your position, and it may well be the FSF's as
well. (Note: neither you nor I have the authority to speak for that
organization, or for this one for that matter ;-)
Where in the GPL does it say "You can't run this software on a proprietary
> But if you try to make a variant of the GNU system in which the kernel
> isn't even free, you've stripped out an essential part of the GNU
> system, so that the result is not even a variant of the GNU system
How so. Which piece of the GNU system is missing? The Linux kernel is not
GNU software, even though it has been released under the GPL, is it?
> > No, I'm saying that it is silly to suggest that Debian becomes less free
> > when run on a proprietary OS.
> Debian is the complete OS, not some random assemblege of pieces. If
> the complete OS isn't free, then it isn't free.
So, glibc on a Sun kernel becomes a non-free software?
Give me a break!
If every piece of software in the distro is free then the distro is free.
Not delivering a kernel that is free has no effect on the freeness of the
> If you want to take a bunch of Debian packages and port them to
> windoze, feel free! All I ask is:
> 1) Don't call it GNU.
No problem I could GAS.
> 2) Don't call it Debian.
Under what logic? It's build by DDs out of Debian distributed free
software. What part fails to be Debian?
> 3) Don't use Debian resources for the effort.
Why not? We use Debian resources for explicity non-free software, and this
So far I haven't heard a good argument from you against this, except that
you don't like it on some moral principle that I don't agree with. Freedom
is not morally compromized by association with proprietary environs, only
by proprietary behavior, and your position is restrictive in a proprietary
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "Dwarf's Guide to Debian GNU/Linux" _-_-_-_-_-_-
_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769 _-
_- Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road _-
_- e-mail: email@example.com Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-
_-_-_-_-_- Released under the GNU Free Documentation License _-_-_-_-
available at: http://www.polaris.net/~dwarf/