From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Louis Subject: Re: (Really) Free Software future Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 11:30:31 +0530 Message-ID: <20191016060031.GM7026@protected.rcdrun.com> References: <20191010070606.GW27628@protected.rcdrun.com> <8561e1505c3d90c4deb8bdbfb1a20dced6e96066.camel@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gnu-system-discuss-bounces+gcgs-gnu-system-discuss=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "gnu-system-discuss" To: Svante Signell Cc: Guix-devel@gnu.org, gnu-system-discuss@gnu.org List-Id: guix-devel.gnu.org * Svante Signell [2019-10-16 02:23]: > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 22:41 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: > >=20 > > If systemD is be hard to replace, that is a kind of lock-in. But it > > isn't _vendor_ lock-in. systemD, like most free software packages, > > is not tied to any particular vendor. Indeed, the usual concept of > > vendor for free software is not applicable to free software at all. >=20 > Sorry Richard, but it is really a vendor lock-in. As you know there is > only one _upstream_ of systemd and that upstream is a company. Systemd > software is developed by that company, and as you also know is that > contributions, patches and bug reports coming from outside that company > are frown upon. People reporting issues are even met with hostility. systemd binaries are dependent on systemd and replaces programs that did not have such dependencies. It is creating similar situation as vendor lock-in is creating. Some references: - https://suckless.org/sucks/systemd/ - http://judecnelson.blogspot.com/2014/09/systemd-biggest-fallacies.html - https://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0/ - https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2016/05/18/systemd-it-keeps-getting-worse= / where it says: "One of systemd=E2=80=99s main goals is to unify basic L= inux configurations and service behaviors across all distributions." There is my personal protest against the systemd's LGPL license. It is service manager and not a special library that shall sacrifice freedom in special cases. Issue with the LGPL license is that me personally, for GNU system, I would prefer GPL only license and not LGPL allowing proprietary software into free software system distributions. systemd does create control of few developers of systemd and vendors of various GNU/Linux operating systems over its users. systemd does create situation as "programmers controlling computing" and not "users having freedom in their own computer". That GNOME requires systemd is sad situation, it shall be independnet of service manager. Jean