Re: [Dragora-bug] The distribution's name - technical and ethical sides of a

[Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro]

> the fact you have to deblob the kernel doesn't make it different of
> linux.

If it does not make it a different "Linux" why we cannot use the
original "Linux"?  Why are we deblobbing it?  Is a proprietary program
the same that a free one?

> (and the proprietary blobs in the kernel aren't a major part of it,
> actually they're a small one)

It is not the point.  It does not matter what fraction of "Linux" are
proprietary blobs; what is important is that "Linux" is a kernel which
have proprietary pieces.  Whether it is small or large fraction, the
fact is that "Linux" is a proprietary program, and many people do not
want to admit that, separating the blobs as if they are distinct
entities, not part of "Linux".  Of course they are part of it.  And if
you remove the blobs, it is ethically another software.  The free kernel
does not deserve be named equal an unethical one.  The user deserves to
know clearly that difference at the first look.  We cannot admit that a
simply misname threaten the understanding of our noble values.  Naming
the kernel in a different manner is a way to bring our messages to the
world: we do not give up our freedom by simple convenience; we do not
approve what the "Linux" developers have been doing, therefore, do not
confuse our kernel with that "Linux" that subjugates you and does not
respect our community.

-- 
 ,= ,-_-. =.  Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro (oitofelix)
((_/)o o(\_)) Uns o chamam de super-boi...
 `-'(. .)`-'  Outros de hiper-cavalo...
     \_/      Eu o chamo simplesmente: meta-gnu!