Please keep this on-list or out of my mailbox.
On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 03:38:43PM +0530, V. Karthik Kumar wrote:
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
| Hash: SHA1
|
| Paul de Weerd wrote:
| > On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
| > | > On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users
| installing
| > | > non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this
| needs to
| > | > be documented for users to get their job done faster.
| > | >
| > |
| > | If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
| > | putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'; You shouldn't be
| > | fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather,
| >
| > You really have no clue about what the portstree and the packages do
| > in OpenBSD, do you ?
| >
| I use OpenBSD and ports. Go check out Freenode #openbsd
Good for you. That doesn't mean you actually understand what's going
on.
| > OpenBSD is Free, Functional and Secure. This is not required from
| > software you install from packages or via the ports tree. It's the OS
| > that is free. Try to understand : all of OpenBSD is Free. Everything.
| > Nothing in OpenBSD is not free (barring bugs, but I believe those have
| > been eradicated by now). The kernel is free, binaries and manpages are
| > free, the ports tree is free, software used to install packages
| > (pkg_add) is free, free free free. You can get them at no extra charge
| > (apart from you internet connection fee + storage cost etc.) so the OS
| > is free as in "gratis" or "without charge". You can look at the source
| > of the kernel, binaries, manpages, portstree, pkg_add and change them
| > to your liking so the OS is free as in "freedom" : you have the
| > freedom to use and change it as you like.
| Look, I know all this.
Do you now ? So you know that OpenBSD is free ?
| > OpenBSD got to be free because it fights blob vendors and calls them
| > nasty names. This keeps the OS Free (no restricting your freedom) and
| > Functional (it actually works on the hardware) and Secure (no blobs
| > running on your CPU/in your kernel that may do whatever).
| >
| Look, first the blobs may do whatever. Userland can equally do
| whatever. Adobe Flash Player restricts my freedom because the whole
| world is putting Flash sites and I need to trust a binary whose code
| is not available to view the site on my OpenBSD system. Worse, some
| people need to use flash based forms to authenticate or to navigate to
| pages (read some previous posts by people having such difficulty with
| government sites).. I am asking: why use such things and bring doom
| upon yourself?
Ah, I see. Adobe Flash Player. I'm sorry, could you point to the
location in the OpenBSD cvs repository that gives me Adobe Flash
Player ? I mean the player (or its source), not a file that contains a
URL to where you can download the player.
I think most here know that the internet has a lot of Flash. Perhaps
you can point to the website that states that one of the goals of the
OpenBSD project is to prevent people from using flash.
| I really don't like such binaries encouraged as part of OpenBSD. I am
| sure many people will accept my stand on this.
Nobody (at least, nobody with something to say on the matter) is
encouraging such binaries to be part of OpenBSD. And the good part
is : it isn't ! Adobe Flash is not part of OpenBSD. And it probably
never will be (I doubt Adobe will ever release the source under a
permissive license).
| > And another cool part : OpenBSD does not restrict you (aka, gives you
| > the freedom) in what software you wish to install and run on your
| > system, be it free or non-free. That's another point for the
| > 'free' part : freedom to install non-free software (if you chose to do
| > so) (also, it's another point for the 'functional' part, but that goes
| > without saying).
|
| I am hammering the other side to remove free on non-free as well; I
| hope this will in turn fix problems for OpenBSD from being undermined
| as well. Please understand that. I am not anti-OpenBSD:
| anti-propaganda in general. :-)
I'm not saying you are anti-OpenBSD. You made a claim about OpenBSD
not being free. I'll repeat it here for your convenience :
> If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'; You shouldn't be
> fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather,
Upon close examination, we see that you think that because OpenBSD
allows users to run non-free software (like *EVERY OPERATING SYSTEM
EVER*), it should not be called free and we shouldn't strive to be
free (by fighting blob vendors) either.
YOU ARE WRONG.
A little earlier in this e-mail you said you knew that OpenBSD is
free. All free, 100%. If you know that, why do you then claim that
OpenBSD shouldn't put the 'Free.' in 'Free. Functional, Secure.' ?
I'll make it easy for you and repeat once more : YOU ARE WRONG.
| > | And the rest who do should avoid red herring arguments and accept what
| > | they are doing. In other words, they should say: 'I am wrong. I will
| > | fix the problem at my end. Your turn now.' I don't see anybody doing
| > | it. Don't you see how you're not doing anything but complaining? It
| > | doesn't make this any different.
| >
| > So, in closing : You are wrong, please fix the problem at your end,
| > it's our turn now.
| I'm waiting for your turn now. :-)
Will you then please stop making false claims here and let us have our
turn ?
Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd
--
>++++++++[<++++++++++>-]<+++++++.>+++[<------>-]<.>+++[<+
+++++++++++>-]<.>++[<------------>-]<+.--------------.[-]
http://www.weirdnet.nl/
