On Friday 22 July 2011 14:37:03 Diego Saravia wrote: > > > source of linux libre is linux, and is not free > > > source of icecat is firefox and we are seeing that is not free > > > > Source of Linux-libre is Linux-libre, completely free: > > http://www.fsfla.org/svnwiki/selibre/linux- > > libre/download/releases/LATEST-2.6.39.0/linux-2.6.39-libre.tar.bz2 > > > > Source of GNU IceCat, again completely free: > > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gnuzilla/5.0/icecat-5.0.tar.bz2 > > that files are not sources, sources are in linux project and mozilla > proyects. Linuxlibre and ice-cat are usefull, to aloud people to use only > free software without restrictions, to know what happens in each machine > (blobs) (if they have the hardware) or to aloud to sell software, but they > don' t provide sources. They provide a sub product of the real sources, that > are not free. A restricted set of software that is free. > > these files are modified by hand or in automatic way (like kernel in ututo), > bur are not sources > > call them sources is like call sources a grammar in c produced by > yacc/bisson > > there are not legaly sources, and is not a good idea to think of them as a > new project, becouse the people that really do the code are not in > linux-libre nor in ice cat project. They are not new projects, nor forks, > and continue to be that way, each new version is constructed from a new > version of the very sources. Only one criterion: remove non free, restrict > the universo of machines to the one in wich only free soft. could be run.
Do we have compilable code that produces a free browser and a free kernel? If the answer is yes, then your point is moot. I call that sources, if you want to pick at semantics minutae then you're alone on that. -- RMS Rose GNU/Linux-libre http://rmsgnulinux.com.ar #rmsgnulinux @ irc.freenode.net
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
