El vie, 14-12-2007 a las 15:49 -0500, Richard Stallman escribiC3: > Since both emacs and gcc contain code inside them which permit them to > compile and run on commercial operating systems which are non-free, > you are a slimy hypocrite. > > I see you are being your usual friendly self ;-}.
I see that you only do misc-understanding, flood, partial true, partial lie and blablablabing. You reply what you want, to the messages that you want, and there are a lot of things that have been asked or mentioned in the air. > There is a big practical difference between making a free system > suggest a non-free package, and making a free package run on a > non-free system. We treat the two issues differently because they are > different. No, the difference is clear, but the implication on the issue, and what you can recommend, is not clear for you. Being according to all your words, you must go to the public and only recommend to use flood to write on stones. > People already know about non-free systems such as Windows, so it is > unlikely that the mention of them in a free package will tell them > about a system and they will then switch to it. Also, switching > operating systems is a big deal. People are unlikely to switch to a > non-free operating system merely because a free program runs on it. I think different, but i'm not RMS and my words haven't the same value. So at now, we have two kinds of free-software fight. The fight that i see (the excellent work of openbsd) and the "rms vs the world" fight. > Thus, the risk of leading people to use a non-free system by making a > free program run on it is small. However, it is our practice when > doing this to remind people that the non-free system is unethical and > bad for your freedom. If the pages about the Emacs binaries for Windows > don't say this, I'll make sure to add it. ooops another mistake, another bug fixed... B?would you go to the public and fix the bug that you did about OpenBSD? > By contrast, many non-free applications are not well known, and > installing one is much easier--it does not require changing everything > else you do. Thus, even telling people about a non-free application > could very well lead them to install it. Oh yes. Like all references to skipe, nvidia, etc that are on the ututo servers and official forums. B?can you recommend that? Also, you made a statement only by a few URLs. So... have you checked all the code under the source, .debs, kernel, infrastructure, etc of the two distributions that you recommend? there are not non-free urls? > I've published both of these positions before, but in this discussion > I only mentioned the one that is relevant to my views about OpenBSD. > Is that hypocrisy? Is that lying? No, just sticking to the point. > But now that people have raised the other issue, here is my position > on it. Say something that you think, is not hypocrisy. Say something and do the oposite is hypocrisy. Say something that is true, is not lying. Say something that is not true, is lying. Take the port of opera, and look at it. The work that openbsd porters do is free-software. The work that openbsd distribute is free-software. You are attacking the ports, a tool of general purpose to install programs. Just like tar, dpkg, apt, aptitude, sinaptyc. There are a few "non-free" ports, just like there are teras of non-free software for ututo and gnewsense. You are arguing that your words, was because you don't want that a newbye that try bsd, will end up using a non-free port. But there are other words than "OpenBSD includes non-free programs" to say that thing, because it isn't true. Come on. Look whit effort on the Linux kernel version of gnewsense (i know its hard), look at all the base and userland that it allow, search hardly on the universe repository, mono, etc and then kill yourself because you have nothing to recommend, or shut up and code. gnewsense line: take the work of vanilla kernel, ubuntu that is taken from debian, that is taken from all the world (including bsd), and castrate it openbsd line: (good)code, documentation, legal, new things, security, freedom, fight, drivers, speak to hardware manufacturers, produce, be honest and don't listen and think stupid abstract semi questions. Bye.
