El mar, 11-12-2007 a las 14:00 -0500, Richard Stallman escribiC3: > My main basis for judging any distro is the policies it has adopted.
So a distro that comes (de-binaryzed) from ubuntu, that comes from debian that any of them allow you to install a (nvidia) blob or any of the non-free ports of openbsd, is more convenient that a system that fight over all, about the freedom of the users, developers and of the code. Please, dear rms, you can use any thing like opera on ututo or gnewsense, also you can taint the kernel, or browse in emacs for a flash web (the last is a fake, i think ;). > Everyone makes mistakes, and well-intentioned people fix their > mistakes. So if someone finds a non-free program in gNewSense, or in > OpenBSD, in violation of the distro's policies, that's no disaster. I > trust the developers will remove it once they find out. Pretty, even if they could develop something on the O.S. to avoid the use of blobs, firmwares, and non gpl'ed software by the users, it could be a killer Linux distribution. > On the other hand, if a distro's policies say something is allowed, > then it isn't a mistake, and I can't expect it to be fixed. That's > what gives me stronger concern. The presence of non-free programs > in the OpenBSD ports system is not a mistake, it's intentional. Yes, like all the really free developed drivers, like the fight for documentation of hardware, excellent code and better license, like the really hard decisions that OpenBSD has chose about software and licenses on his time line. It is intentional and appreciated :) But say that OpenBSD is not a "recomendable" distribution for people that wants freedom, is like say that it is insecure by default, and is better a popolulufufulunix that comes whit a firewall activated by default. Greetings, and have a nice day. IC1igo
