I'm not saying it is not free software. Of that I have no doubt.
Just that the term "ecosystem" is really pretentious.
It sounds like you have just left some sort of weird business course on "IP
law" and all that crap.
I agree, an 'ecosystem' is something I'd like not to be associated with free
software.
Trisquel 8 will have Unity, Mir, and Snap because it uses the Ubuntu packages
and therefore is part of the "ecosystem" I speak of. All are considered free
software and created by Canonical. Whether others adapt them or not, it's
their win or loss.
Evasive is not the right word.
I think, clandestine is a better word. It is not right to include ZFS if it
violates the GPL. They are just as bad for including it, and just as bad for
including proprietary software.
Canonical have 'not invented here' syndrome. Snap packages are a load of bs.
Debian's approach is much less evasive than the Ubuntu and is more ideal. Why
does it need to be installed by default for desktop users? It is more of a
server technology and if you are tech savvy enough to know how to use and
administer ZFS, you are more than willing to manually install a
Yeah... This is what makes me mad. It's similar to Fedoras slogan:
"Freedom, Friends, First"... Oh my gnu!... It seems like false
advertisements.
If Debian wanted to comply with the GNU FSDG, they would merely need to stop
having contrib and non-free repositories on their official servers and not
showing people how to install non-free software. They are free apart from
that. I know some people here use Debian. I think they know about
I know some people here in Brazil which are blindly advocating Debian as
a free system distribution, and this freaks me out because gNewSense
isn't getting the lead.
Some people here in Brazil advocate for gNewSense, and I support their
advocacy.
In both cases, one must understand that what
I think it is bad for them to host the non-free repositories. I can
understand perhaps for firmware that is barely acceptable, but I do not think
they can really say Debian is "completely free software", when they just
don't enable the bad stuff by default.
It doesn't mean we shouldn't use
>Debian comes and contrary to the principles of freedom
to put ZFS in Linux kernel
Debian's kernel is deblobbed and it will remain deblobbed (fully free). They
put the module in contrib.
While there is a difference in how Canonical and the Debian Project are
handling this: Canonical, as we all know, has it pre-compiled while the
Debian Project provides source code that is compiled when someone installs
the package. This difference doesn't actually matter.
I'll call what
I suspect they write the CDDL so they can go after companies profiting from
GNU/Linux systems with ZFS distributed. They obviously still want this as an
option because they have not re-licensed it to GPL. So I think Canonical
could be in for trouble, but regarding Debian I doubt it.
Trisquel does not distribute anything that violates copyrights significantly.
Things like emulators are a grey area, but court cases have shown that if
such programs are made through reverse engineering they do not violate
copyright; you can just play homebrew games or ROM images you ripped
ZFS, as it is currently shipping in Ubuntu, opens it up to controversy since
it is an enabled kernel module that Canonical ships with each kernel update.
There is also another method of getting ZFS by manually installing the
packages which more people are comfortable with like how Debian is
It's in the "contrib" repository.
So no.
Robert Browning opens his poem in this text
"""
Just for a handful of silver he left us,
Just for a riband to stick in his coat—
Found the one gift of which fortune bereft us,
Lost all the others she lets us devote;
"""
ZFS is file system develop by sun Micro systems
But it is not
I hope I made my self clear.
Bottom line it is a legal issue that is not about being right or wrong. And
is an important one as it is about respecting users freedom.
Hi t3g
ZFS is not a probelm of being right or wrong. It is about license.
As any other software, unless it is under public domain, ZFS comes with a
license, a license which is called
Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL)
Now, GNU/Linux is an Operative system with a license
Sigh, no, the reporting on this is terrible. Isn't it great when people
trying to mislead don't have press skills?
http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Debian_now_with_ZFS_on_Linux_included.html
zfs-linux will make its way into Debian Unstable soon. Maybe the FSF was
wrong about ZFS all along and maybe the Trisquel team should reconsider the
exclusion of ZFS packages that can be manually installed?
20 matches
Mail list logo
