> callousness of microsoft, > and callousness of systemd devs. I know that systemd is not your preferred init system, but do you really think Red Hat and Microsoft are comparable?
Red Hat creates free software that not everybody likes. There is nothing unethical about not pleasing everybody. Microsoft on the other hand creates mostly proprietary software, much of which is malware. This is unethical. These two bug reports don't seem comparable either. The vscode bug has been ignored by the developers and left unfixed for over a year. It is still a problem. The systemd bug was fixed promptly. It stopped being a problem a long time ago. I'm glad that there are FSDG distros like Parabola and Hyperbola that support other init systems so that people who do not prefer systemd have these options, but this is not a freedom issue. If "init freedom" is having a choice between different init systems, then Hyperbola and Trisquel offer very little init freedom, as they each support only one init system. In both cases, however, the init system is free software, so this doesn't make Hyperbola and Trisquel less free than Parabola, which supports two init systems. Similarly, none of these distros have very much "kernel freedom" as they only support Linux-libre. However, Linux-libre is free software, so this does not make them less free than GuixSD, which has support for Hurd in development. Also similarly, Devuan reduced the number of choices of desktop environment by excluding GNOME, so it has less "desktop freedom" than Debian. However, as long as the desktop environments that it does include are free software, this does not make Devuan less free than Debian (although it may be less free for other reasons). Lack of support for certain software is not a freedom issue, as long as the software that is supported is free.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
