Matthew Garrett writes: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> But how do you argue that a hand-crafted binary is sufficiently > >> modifiable without also admitting the possibility that the output > >> of a C compiler may be sufficiently modifiable? > > > > I think it depends what the upstream author is using as source. > > How about you? > > Why does it depend on what the upstream author is using as source? How > does that affect the recipient's ability to modify the work?
One of the underpinnings of the Free Software movement is that users of software should not be made second-class citizens when it comes to altering the software. This is what drives the desire to have "sufficiently modifiable" source, and it is neatly more objective than a metric of "sufficient modifiability." Users should have the same opportunities to modify software as its original author(s) have. If the original author had to pay for a non-free tool, or had to study some advanced topic for years to grok the algorithims, so be it. If the original author uses C source, it violates Free Software's principles to expect others to edit the preprocessor or compiler output to modify the software. Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
