Re: considered harmful (was [off topic] Learning Shell from an old UNIX book)
Aryan Ameri writes:
> OK you guys say that, OOo is bad software because they use csh, and they
> use java to build it. Don't get me wrong, I am a true believer in free
> software, but I guess sometimes, you have to see things from a different
> point of view.
My main objection is not that csh and Java are unfree: there are Free
implementations of both (though I doubt OOo builds with anything
non-Sun). My main objection is that their use is evidence of bad
engineering.
> And in my opinion, using non free software in developing a software,
> shouldn't disqualify it from being free software...
A package that cannot be built without non-free software, as is almost
certainly the case with OOo, is not very free (though a fully Free version
could be derived from it). I will not install any software that I could
not build from source if I wished. I could not build OOo from source
because I will not install non-Free software and I am not interested enough
in it to take on the task of removing the Java build dependency.
> Besides, Linus is also using non free software to develop the
> kernel. Does that also mean, that we should all abandon the Linux kernel,
> and regard it as non free software?
The kernel build system requires no non-free software. One can compile
kernels and contribute to kernel development using only Free software.
Using non-free software and making a package build-depend on it are two
entirely different things.
--
John Hasler
john@dhh.gt.org (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
Reply to: