Re: L4-hurd discuss

[Neil Santos]

On 22:42 22/06/05, Matthew Dempsky wrote:

> > Yes i know you could say use GNU/Linux intead but
> > Linux itself dont honours GNU and is not related with
> > FSF spirit. GNU based on HURD/Mach is very slow (and
> 
> Linus may not see eye-to-eye with the FSF

Isn't this just a bit of an understatement?  UIM, more often than not,
Linus and RMS aren't even looking in the same general direction.

> but at least Linux is licensed under the GNU GPL.  Are you implying
> the CDDL-licensed OpenSolaris kernel some how better fits the FSF
> spirit?

Are you implying that the choice of license alone decides whether a
software is free?  Oh, sure, Linux is under the GPL---but only under
version 2, as the clause that allows end-users to choose any later
version was taken out.  Not much of a problem today, but what about in
the years to come, when something borken in society is worked-around
by a later version of the GPL?  The freedom to use Linux under the
terms of a later version of the GPL won't be available to us, and we'd
have to live with the theoretical borken thing, if we're to use Linux
at all.

And besides, up until a few months ago, Linux was kept under
Bitkeeper.  Doesn't anyone remember how Linus reacted when told that
the actions of another FOSS developer was cited as one of the reasons
BitMover pulled out?  He was *pissed* that anyone else would exercise
their freedom and go do something about BitMover's proprietary noose
that was on all of our necks.

I'm not saying Linux doesn't fit the goal of the FSF; it does, but
only to the letter.  As for OpenSolaris, well...  If its source would
be made available using a free versioning system, stayed away from
including proprietary hardware drivers, and was licensed under any of
the licenses the FSF considers free, then it *will* fit the spirit of
the FSF's goals better than Linux.

I'm thankful for Linux, and grateful to Linus; I want to make that
clear.  But I'm still glad that no one can turn Linux into something
proprietary...
-- 
address@hidden        If we're good enough to choose our governors, doesn't
Freedom: Too high a price      that mean we're good enough to govern ourselves?