we hav the source we can control to pc 2015-03-22 12:32 جرينتش-08:00, Miles Fidelman <[email protected]>: > Folks, > > I've been watching the ongoing battles raging around systemd - and being > bitten by it, as I consider upgrading a bunch of Debian based system, > and dread the lurking dependencies that come with a radical > re-architecting of critical system components. > > The weekend of Libreplanet seems to be as good an opportunity to raise > this, as any. > > I've begun to wonder if there is a conflict between software freedom and > key pieces of software that create massive dependency webs. Or put > another way, "vendor lock-in." > > The basic FSF definition of software freedom focuses on four basic > freedoms: > > * The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom > 0). > * The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does > your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is > a precondition for this. > * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor > (freedom 2). > * The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others > (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance > to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a > precondition for this. > > I begin to wonder if programs that create massive dependencies - such as > systemd - directly conflict with freedom 0. The more that a specific > piece of code becomes required, for other code to work - the less free > we become to run other programs. In general, there has been a trend > toward cross-platform development, along with cleanly defined interfaces > that allow for interchangeable parts (e.g., exim vs. postfix vs. > sendmail). To date, this carries down to the o/s level (Linux vs. Hurd > vs. BSD vs. Illumos). But systemd reverses that, creating a LOT of > vendor lock-in. (I expect there are other examples, but systemd is the > one that's on stage at the moment - some would say the clear and present > danger.) > > One might also argue that systemd, in particular, conflicts with freedom > 1 - in terms of feature creep, poorly documented code, changing APIs, > etc., etc. > > Which leads me to wonder if we, perhaps, need a 5th freedom: > > * "Freedom from vendor lock-in," or words to that effect. > > One might also want to consider whether the spread of spyware and > malware might inspire a 6th freedom: > > * "Freedom from hidden software" or something like that. > > Or maybe, these are both part of "freedom to control the configuration > of your computing system." > > Opinions? > > Miles Fidelman > > > -- > In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. > In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra > > >
-- Think not of them, thou hast thy music too
