On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:16:07PM +0100, Stephen Stafford wrote: > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > > > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get > > > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else > > > with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW) > > > > As this might be a bit too offensive I apologize if you read it that > > way. Here is an alternative wording which says what I actually meant > > (I never try to write a mail quickly just before I got to bed): > > > > This problem is very common for non-free software. If you want to > > avoid such problems, you could try one of the free alternatives in > > Debian, plex86 and bochs. Those might have other problems (like being > > slower) but you probably won't have the same problems you're having > > now. We can also help you with problems you are having with plex86 and > > bochs. If you insist on using vmware, we can't help you, you should go > > to the vmware guys when you've got problems. > > > > <mindless rant> > > I think you totally miss the point. Free software is about choice. What > you are saying is that it is okay for a library to change in a way that > breaks software which I *choose* to run. The fact that software is non-free > is irrelevant. I *choose* to run it. I made an informed choice. I looked > at the alternatives, and made a decision. You look like you are wanting to > remove my ability to make that choice. I just say the consequences of that choice, that is you're having problems with an old version and you don't have the freedom to fix that. > >From reading this thread, it looks to me almost as if you would advocate a > system whereby Debian refused to run any non-free software at all. s/refused/discouraged/ and I would agree. Isn't the goal of Debian providing a free system so users don't have to run any non-free software anymore? IMHO the "we support non-free software" clause was only temporary, when there are free alternatives for the non-free software we could drop the support of non-free software. I feel the time has come to drop it. > The free alternatives to VMware are not really all that good at all I am > afraid. Development on plex86 has pretty much died since Kevin changed > jobs. bochs was never really an alternative at all, its aims are somewhat > different. True, but plex86 development is going to continue, subscribe to the list if you want to get informed on everything. > VMware might be non-free, but it is damn good. I think for the price of a license you can better buy a nice second-hand computer. I'm sure that will a damn bit better!! (I actually use this method, with an old computer I got for free beer) > When a libc6 change breaks > it, then asking why is not *ever* a bad thing. Expecting changes in libc6 > to not break things is sensible. If it does break stuff then we should look > at why. We looked at it. We saw it wasn't libc's fault. > If it turns out that the breakage is unavoidable, or serves a greater good > then fine. I don't really understand this case well enough to know if that > is the case or not. The breakage is/was deemed necessary by the libc6 > maintainer (presumably) and I tend towards trusting Ben's judgement. It's not really breakage, it's fixing a bug. The programs which now break were buggy, I don't see why there should be any support for that. Instead, the programs should get fixed. > Your "advocacy" looks like so much wind and piss in all honesty. You do no > favours either to yourself or to the free software movement by it. You look > and sound like a rabid, unthinking, kneejerking moron. That is usually a > description reserved for RMS :) I already said people compare me with RMS and I take it as a compliment. Actually, there are people who can work with me (Yes, really!), there are also enough people who can work with RMS. Personally I never worked with RMS or discussed with him, but I don't think I would have big problems with that. I never see why everybody just say that RMS and GNU are bad. > Seriously examine what it is that you are saying. What it looks like to me > (at least, probably others too) is "You run non-free software, so fuck off, > we hate you, we hate your mother, we hate your sister's cat. Go whinge to > the people who made the non-free software, because they should have forseen > when they wrote their software a couple of years ago that we were going to > break it." This want not meant so, I already apologized about that. Do I have to do more? > When I joined Debian I did so with the understanding that "Our priorities > are our users and free software". Free software is not served at all by > your silly rants, and our users are definitely not served by firstly having > the software they *choose* to run break, and secondly being insulted and > belittled by you for making that choice. True, the best way would have been that they didn't have to run non-free software. That's one of the reasons I'm subscribed to the plex86 mailinglist. This case actually shows that it is very important that plex86 development will continue. It convinced me to put some energy in the plex86 project soon. > One way or the other, VMware not working any more is a bug somewhere. > Whether it is a bug in libc6 or a bug in VMware itself. Since VMware has > been running on this machine essentially without change for over a year, and > a new version of libc6 has just been installed, then surely I can be > forgiven for asking questions of libc6 first? True, but if you read the thread, it's actually already said it's a vmware bug, that a patch is available for the newer version and that . > I know that it is very easy to be infected by the rabidity of "non-free is > bad by definition -- people who use it are either evil or > misguided". I never think they are evil, I think they are victims. I personally feel that I've to advocate free software and write free software. > All I can do is assure you that most people grow out of that. I can assure I will never grow out of it. Did people ever grow out of complaing when somebody takes away their freedom of speech? I don't think so and I don't see a reason that it will be different with software freedom. > I *choose* to use non-free software of many kinds. Of course you can choose that you don't want freedoms. But don't complain that you haven't those freedoms. > I am also forced to do so ssometimes. <RMS argument>Does somebody points a gun to your head then?</RMS argument> > I > will *not* have someone try to make me feel evil, stupid or misguided > because of it. No, but you have to work with the problems of non-free software then. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: jeroen@openprojects
Attachment:
pgpIgKnZOaeZY.pgp
Description: PGP signature