From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marek Aaron Sapota Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Gentoo GNU/Linux and non-free packages Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 19:06:22 -0500 Message-ID: <20100108000622.GA1426@fencepost.localnet> References: <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> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262909200 12446 80.91.229.12 (8 Jan 2010 00:06:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 00:06:40 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 08 01:06:33 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 1NT2N6-00085e-Mw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 01:06:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35519 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NT2N7-0006kj-9S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:06:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NT2N2-0006ke-Od for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:06:28 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NT2Mx-0006kS-EO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:06:27 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37979 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NT2Mx-0006kO-5a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:06:23 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:54047) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NT2Mw-000244-NS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:06:22 -0500 Original-Received: from maarons by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NT2Mw-0003oZ-Gw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:06:22 -0500 Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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:119631 Archived-At: --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 05:49:13PM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: > 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. >=20 > 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.) Gentoo devs have already chosen - by default it is everything that doesn't require explicit agreement from user and this aren't only FSF and OSI approved licenses. As reference: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D152593 It is possible to use only Free Software with Gentoo but it isn't that easy: - packages have non-free dependences, sometimes programs compile fine without them, but they are pulled in anyway - some free "alternatives" are only in additional repositories - predefined license groups (for example FSF approved) are not complete - some packages have wrong licenses (usually license is named after the package even if it really is for example GPL) Gentoo isn't even close to being a Free Distribution in FSF sense, I have no idea why some people treat it as such. Happy hacking Marek Aaron Sapota --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFLRnb+Pw8cAmBIdTMRAkb2AKCa1J8mOnpXqBz1owJL72FisttLuACfXs5H f6yLe92vs1siHtWBVUQIWZE= =EQ6u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw--