[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian trademark [was: Debian GNU/w32, may ready to be started?]

On 3 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:

> Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> writes:
> > On 3 Dec 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > 
> > > Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> 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
> anymore. 

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
other components.

> 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
isn't that.

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:  dwarf@polaris.net     Tallahassee, FL  32308        _-
_-                                                                    _-
_-_-_-_-_-  Released under the GNU Free Documentation License   _-_-_-_-
              available at: http://www.polaris.net/~dwarf/

Reply to: