Re: (Really) Free Software future

[Stefan Huchler <stefan.huchler@mail.de>]

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?

<marinus.savoritias@tuta.io> 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 :)