From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Gentoo GNU/Linux and non-free packages Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:49:13 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20091228170401.GA4553@muc.de> <20091231120648.GA2801@muc.de> <4B3CD9A9.9030705@harpegolden.net> <20100103173342.GA1653@muc.de> <87bphbf3zy.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> <20100103215647.GC1653@muc.de> <87637i709n.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> <87ocl9wqjp.fsf_-_@thinkpad.tsdh.de> <201bac3a1001051610t25a1a767v79398943193c3e89@mail.gmail.com> <87iqbexqgi.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262904570 30945 80.91.229.12 (7 Jan 2010 22:49:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 22:49:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jonas@bernoulli.cc, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tassilo Horn Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 07 23:49:23 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NT1AQ-0005ym-Mo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 23:49:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59784 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NT1AR-0000EW-8A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:49:23 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NT1AN-0000Dz-AX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:49:19 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NT1AI-0000CS-Q8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:49:19 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37709 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NT1AI-0000CN-L9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:49:14 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:35683) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NT1AI-0002O8-7m; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:49:14 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NT1AH-00015Q-TP; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:49:13 -0500 In-reply-to: <87iqbexqgi.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> (message from Tassilo Horn on Thu, 07 Jan 2010 09:35:25 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:119625 Archived-At: >From what you've said, even with the license filter activated, Gentoo GNU/Linux will still tantalize users with non-free programs they might install. That doesn't seem satisfactory. Furthermore, use of the license filter will be optional. If a person goes look at the Gentoo site with a view to installing it, unless he is already convinced that proprietary software is bad, he won't use the license filter. And then Gentoo might lead him to install lots of non-free programs. This is not what I developed GNU for. | Gentoo makes it easy to install a number of nonfree programs through | their primary package system. `---- Well, that hardly qualifies as an still standing argument. As soon as the new package manager version is stable, it's only a matter of what defaults the Gentoo devs choose as acceptable licenses. I guess, they will choose only FSF and OSI approved licenses. Are you saying that the Gentoo developers might soon delete all the ports for non-free programs from Gentoo? That could make it a 100% free distro, and we might be able to endorse it. (We would have to check for blobs in their version of Linux.) But that sounds too good to be true, so I suspect there is a misunderstanding of some sort. Perhaps you mean that the Gentoo developers will decide not to install the nonfree programs on their own machines. That would be the right thing to do, for their own freedom's sake. But it would not alter the problem with Gentoo, which is that it steers users towards nonfree programs. Nonfree software is an injustice. The aim of our work is to eliminate that injustice. We must never treat nonfree software as a solution, because that would imply it isn't the problem.