Re: free, freer, freest
Bruce Sass wrote:
> What is the FSF, what does the FSF do that GNU can not, and why.
GNU is a project to create a free-software implementation of Unix. The
FSF is an organisation set up to run the project. Please see the GNU
pages for more. <http://www.gnu.org/>
> Is Debian a front for GNU, or an independent entity.
Debian is a distribution of GNU software, the Linux kernel, and other
software that meets the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
> GNU's idea of "free" appears quite different: subject to the will of
> GNU; confined to GNU's notion of "free"; obligated to follow GNU
> philosophy.
The GNU definition of free software can be read on their web site. The
GNU project does not encompass all free software, and not all free
software has been released under the GNU GPL.
> wouldn't the average reasonable person assume that the "free" in "free
> software" carries the same meaning as the word "free" does when used in
> other contexts. GNU may champion "free software", but it does not
> champion "free", the 17,000+ byte General Public License makes that clear.
The GNU GPL is, to paraphrase RMS, "only meant to solve some of the
world's problems, not all of them". What do you expect? That a
*software* license will guarantee all your human freedoms?
> My biggest worry is that Debian will become too GNUish
I don't understand the term "GNUish". The DFSG have not changed for
quite a while and there is no proposal in place to change them now.
What is it you fear will happen?
> Why doesn't GNU set up their own front-end to Debian,
> one that only allows access to what GNU considers to be "free"?
Possibly because, as another poster said, Debian is doing quite well in
separating between free and non-free. In fact, as another pointed out,
it is the *only* distribution that currently makes the distinction
clear. The current proposal is intented (I believe) to clarify the
distinction further.
> Users and developers would then be able to make a choice between a
> free Debian style Linux/HURD/whatever distribution, and the GNU window
> into the same distribution.
Explain your understanding of "free Debian style" as opposed to the "GNU
window into" a distribution. I don't see anything in the current
proposal, or RMS's comments, that advocates a GNU-only approach to
anything.
> This suggestion could result in Debian becoming the freest software
> distribution around, rather than a second-rate distribution because it
> is missing currently important pieces like Netscape and ssh.
You seem to suggest that the lack of *non-free* packages like Netscape
Communicator and SSH is what is keeping Debian from being the "freest
software distribution around". That is a patent contradiction, so
either I don't get what you're saying, or you're confused.
--
Regards,
Ben Finney, System Administrator
PrintSoft Pty Ltd
Reply to: