From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Huchler Subject: Re: (Really) Free Software future Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 22:49:27 +0200 Message-ID: <87tv8bxdbc.fsf@mail.de> References: <20191010070606.GW27628@protected.rcdrun.com> <8561e1505c3d90c4deb8bdbfb1a20dced6e96066.camel@gnu.org> <3fe3d102-194d-8872-61ef-45337357ca4a@vapaa.xyz> <22d4a960b7ee45c48dcff0ca7afa7d93cf2b81d0.camel@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55654) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iK7IJ-0005XL-Cb for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 16:50:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iK7II-0006cp-0V for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 16:50:19 -0400 Received: from 195-159-176-226.customer.powertech.no ([195.159.176.226]:48014 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iK7IH-0006cR-P8 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 16:50:17 -0400 Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iK7IC-000EIK-9X for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 22:50:12 +0200 List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: guix-devel@gnu.org Cc: gnu-system-discuss@gnu.org Hi, isn't that what basically every Developer does? If I write a program and it's elisp there is only as far as I know one interpreter and all libs I use are also not replacable without rewriting code. So is all my programmes I ever wrote also not Free software because it's not based on some very primitive Kernel Systemcalls (that have to be then not even linux specific right? Then 99% of GPL software out there would not really be free software. So that A only runs with B seems no good Definition you would have to provide some other definition that makes Gnome here a special case. I assume you would bring up that a DE is some sort of base level software that is no application layer software in itself but part of a Operation System, like the UI in Windows is also considered part of the OS? I could see that argument if Gnome would be the only grafical environment for Linux in existence, and even then I wonder what's the problem with rewriting it to run without systemd? It's like saying a software that has not my wished Feature A / B / C is not free software. But we don't meassure freedom in how much and which features a software has. Sorry to interject that discussion but maybe that is helpful? writes: > But that is achieved with forks of systemd tools and messing with the source code. > How does that make GNOME independent from Systemd? > > Fannys > > Oct 14, 2019, 20:59 by jgibbons2357@gmail.com: > > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 21:32 +0300, Alexander Vdolainen wrote: > > Hi, > > On 10/14/19 9:16 PM, Paul Smith wrote: > > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 18:52 +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > > > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 12:13 -0400, Paul Smith wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 12:07 +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > > (skipped) > > > For example, no aspect of either GNOME or systemd are proprietary, > > using the common meaning of the term. Also, "lock-in" usually refers > > to software that prevents users from switching to an alternative; GNOME > > and systemd are certainly not lock-in. > > I'm afraid but I cannot agree with that. Actually with systemd design > you have 'lock-in', because in some cases you need to modify a source > code to support systemd (or you will face something like this - > https://superuser.com/questions/1372963/how-do-i-keep-systemd-from-killing-my-tmux-sessions). > Also, a lot of system daemons has eaten by systemd (and to make it works > some forks were created like eudev). > Finally, correct me if I wrong, but GNOME 3.8 and newer requires systemd > to run, it's a lock-in isn't it ? > > I'm assuming by GNOME you mean gnome-shell. Please let me know if I'm > incorrect. > > Guix has packaged gnome-shell 3.30.2 but has not packaged systemd. > If systemd was a requirement for gnome-shell guix would have had to package > systemd in order for gnome-shell to compile and/or work, by definition of > requirement. > gnome-shell builds and works just fine in guix. > It follows that systemd is not a prerequisite for gnome-shell 3.30.2. > > Please consider this a friendly correction :)