Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 06:33:34PM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:43:22AM -0400, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > If there are only proprietary programs that do a specific job, and it
> > is desired to have a free program for this job, then we are forced to
> > reinvent the wheel by the proprietary programs licenses.
> Forced to by whom?
By the license on the proprietary programs of course, because we can't
reuse their code. Just as I said in the paragraph you replied to. A
similar problems occurs with software patents that are not freely
> By Jeroen, RMS and you? If there is the proprietary
> program available I can still choose if I am willing to pay for it
> or if I am willing to put in the efforts to build something similar.
Yes, and if you are willing to put in the efforts you are forced to
reinvent the wheel because you can't reuse the proprietary code.
> > > Even RMS used
> > > commercial software when the GNU software for it was not yet written.
> > You mean proprietary software. There is no conflict between the GPL
> Yeah, right, I knew this would come up. I am just short of synonyms for
> proprietary and I did not want to repeat a word all the time since that
> is bad style at least in german.
Using a completely different word is not a way out, and only leads to
misunderstandings and communication problems. Please don't do that.
Using the same specific term for the same specific meaning is not bad
style, but consistency, and important in any technical discussion.
(Or, to pick another example, look into law texts for a place where
repition is used, and very important for exactly the same reasons).
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com