“it’s all GNU goodness”

So, when do we get to the point where it’s okay to see major GNU/Linux distributions giving GNU credit right alongside Linux, not just giving all the credit to Linux (and thus raising the interest in one man who doesn’t agree with software freedom)? If it’s GNU we’re using, why can’t we all give credit where credit is due for GNU as a principal contributor?

“Software CAN be Free (using Richard’s terminology) and therefor we believe it will ALL END UP FREE. And we’re committed to reinventing everything we need until the free software stack is a genuinely complete computing universe. We’re already pretty far along.”

Ubuntu just celebrated making it easy to install a proprietary web browser with a couple of clicks while also telling people “Ubuntu will always be free, and will not have restrictive licenses associated with it.”. That’s what I see in the press release. Ubuntu’s philosophy includes “people should have the freedom to customise and alter their software in whatever way they see fit.”. What you say here and how Ubuntu behaves are confusing at best. Clearly it would have been more in line with software freedom to let non-free software distributors set up their own repos under their own aegis while Ubuntu promotes and distributes exclusively free software.

I hope Ubuntu’s developers can help gNewSense find and remove non-free software in the Linux kernel so that Ubuntu GNU/Linux users can get a more free operating system by default. From what I understand on gNewSense’s mailing list, not everything gets caught with CONFIG_PREVENT_FIRMWARE_BUILD=y (assuming Ubuntu GNU/Linux includes kernels built with that).

I’m a bit at odds with proprietary drivers and the like but i can certainly appreciate that if by giving us “software developers” their source and thus their competition this would result in that company loosing profit and therefor R&D and therefor eventually no longer exist, i don’t believe this is what would happen but in most certainly could. “thus lm at odds”

“When the EU was voting on software patents, it was the surprising sight of Red Hat and SUN jointly appealing for clearer thinking that tipped the scales in favour of the defeat of the motion.”

Im a skeptic most of the time – this could just as well be because with software patents it would be harder to steal future gnu stuff.

I do applaud your opinions/efforts and respect in many ways i wish i could stand with you 100% but i have to stand qouted as “RHEL and anything with the TRADEMARK Linux has the potential to be for all intensive purposes closed. imo RHEL will continue to patch software with binary drivers and programs, but “free” software is the opposite to this.

It sounds way to much like you are prepared to do a deal with the devil cause at least it gets them out of the hands of the wolf and then maybe with the angles. But if that is true then where do people who accept binary software to be installed on their system and allow it to be called “free” – were do we stand in rms’ gnu dream ?

Thanks again for all your efforts and im sure a heap of money in the ubuntu project, i would humberly and most respectfully request that you stear the ubuntu community aware from binary software and that your could negotiate with amd and nvidia and the like until they give us the software we need/want/will accept.

Best Regards,
Shaun Lloyd

En días pasados leí en el Blog de Mark Shuttleworth un artículo que tiene cosas por demás ciertas. Desde 1998 estoy utilizando Linux y aún así no me siento experto, sí he adquirido algo de experiencia y conocimientos, pero lo mejor que me ha……