Earlier -
http://www.nabble.com/Real-men-don%27t-attack-straw-men-tp14256924r0p14344642.html
- Richard appears to have explained how when free software programs
support
already-known non-free operating systems, that will not lead to
people not
already using those OS to start using them - but by including
references to
non-free programs in the ports system, OpenBSD can lead people not
already
using non-free programs to using them.
By having links in the port tree to non free software, developers are
encouraged to use free operating system: openbsd.. and it will not
encourage people to migrate away from openbsd over to non-free software.
Rather, it will encourage MORE people to use free software.. since the
majority of openbsd is free software.
By offering GCC on windows, it will encourage less people to use free
software in many cases.. since one can combine the power of Slickedit
and EditPlus and Dev C++ and never ever need to use Linux/BSD.
I personally have use GCC with EditPlus at times.. and in many cases it
saves me from having to boot up a linux box.. i.e. encouraging me NOT to
use free software.
Blah blah blah.
On and on and on and on and on and on and on.
In fact, CoLinux and VirtualBox.. Both GPL AFAIK... allow anyone to run
90 percent of their software apps as non free (microsoft word, windows)
while utilizing GPL kernels at the same time. Since the ratio is 90
percent microsoft, it means it is not encouraging free software.
With open bsd port system, maybe 90 percent of my OS is running OpenBSD
free software.. whereas 10 percent is ports that is non free, or even 1
percent is non free, or similar.
Blah blah blah
On and on and on and on..
