[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient
From: |
Karl Goetz |
Subject: |
Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient |
Date: |
Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:49:15 +1030 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060922) |
Anthony Patarini wrote:
So, what is being proposed is that all Free Software that makes it
trivial for a user to use non-free software be removed? I don't think
that's a good idea at all. The issue with Firefox is that, by default,
*an* issue with firefox.
it links to non-free extensions maybe available by the Mozilla website
itself (From Firefox clicking Tools -> Extensions -> Get More Extensions
The larger problem is the plugins (i thought)
takes you to this page.) However, it would still be trivial to install
non-free extensions by visiting the Mozilla website. The problem is of
course that non-free software is being offered and suggested by the
program itself. To my knowledge, WINE does not do this.
afaik your correct
Ndiswrapper is a bit more troublesome, in that most of its purpose is to
run non-free drivers. However, there are Free Software drivers for
really? i didn't know about that.
ndiswrapper, and the idea that you could write a Free driver that works
on both Windows and GNU/Linux intrigues me and reminds me of the
wonderful technical benefits of Free Software, less important as they
may be. Ndiswrapper itself does not suggest to users where they can
acquire non-free drivers. It's a compatibility layer, plain and simple,
just like WINE. They are both freedom agnostic - they don't restrict
what you can run, they just run it. Just like Mono, which can run Free
and non-Free software. Just like Python, my programming language of
choice, can run free and non-free code.
All programming languages can be used for both types of software -
talking about them doesn't make your point.
The issue at hand, unless I'm mistaken, is that included
software/documentation/etc. should not advocate or suggest the use of
non-free components. That's admirable. But to remove a component simply
because it is capable of running non-free code seems self-defeating and
even, on some levels, opposite the nature and intention of Free Software
in the first place.
removing anything that interacts with non-free isnt functional... unless
we dont need openoffice :)
kk
If anyone feels I've missed something, please enlighten me.
--
Karl Goetz
User of gNewSense: Free as in Freedom - http://www.gnewsense.org
Australian Ubuntu users team - http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AustralianTeam
- [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, James Buchanan, 2006/11/14
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Andrew Wigglesworth, 2006/11/14
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, rek2GNU/Linux, 2006/11/14
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Andrew Wigglesworth, 2006/11/14
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Jorge RodrÃquez, 2006/11/14
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Dave Crossland, 2006/11/14
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, rek2GNU/Linux, 2006/11/14
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Anthony Patarini, 2006/11/14
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Dave Crossland, 2006/11/14
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient,
Karl Goetz <=
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Anthony Patarini, 2006/11/15
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Peter Garrett, 2006/11/15
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, rek2, 2006/11/15
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Andreas K. Foerster, 2006/11/15
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Jorge RodrÃquez, 2006/11/15
- Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: free is not sufficient, Yavor Doganov, 2006/11/15