On 10/16/16, Wookey <woo...@wookware.org> wrote: > On 2016-10-15 16:47 -0500, J.B. Nicholson wrote: > >> I too believe that Debian is hosting nonfree software and integrating >> nonfree software with free software and this is indistinguishable from >> what >> other distros not listed do (such as Ubuntu's GNU/Linux). > > There is a difference: Ubuntu will install non-free software (firmware > needed to make hardware work, and binary drivers) by default. Debian > will not do so unless the user adds the non-free repository (SFAIK).
appreciated you pointing out the distinction / differenec, wookey. i only became aware of the FSF's position from my conversations with josh gay, some eight or so months ago. i've mentioned them on here before: you may have missed them (i'm aware you're a lurker) so am happy to repeat them in this context. the FSF figures that technically-competent people can look after themselves. "technically-competent" is defined as loosely fitting with "someone who has the capacity to take the initiative to seek out help online or from friends, where such help requires *explicit* following (and trust of) *specific* instructions, step-by-step without deviation or elaboration, usually at the command-line". the FSF's position there covers *everyone else*, who, by definition, cannot trust or be trusted to follow explicit written or verbal instructions, cannot cope with a command-line prompt, cannot comprehend the consequences of their actions, does not understand or read "terms and conditions" and so on. these are the people whom the FSF's position protects (from themselves) - they are the people who are extremely likely to go *click* synaptics package manager what's that it's not enabled *click* i wonder what nonfree is don't understand don't care oh well let's enable it anyway *click* oh look there's these extra packages i wonder what they do *click* and now they've opened up a means to compromise their computer and their privacy without *ever* encountering a warning that that was even possible. *that's* what the FSF objects to about debian. it's not that the packages *are* separate, it's that it's *too easy* to install them without any warning of any kind, whatsoever. we as technical people just go in and edit /etc/apt/sources.list and add "nonfree" to the end of the appropriate deb line. *non-technical* people run synaptics and its ilke, where there's a GUI-based no-warnings-whatsoever option *right there* in the menus / dialogs, to enable non-free repositories. anyway. thank you for making me aware that FSF documentation is qualified as non-free, that really made my day. l. _______________________________________________ arm-netbook mailing list email@example.com http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk