[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (Really) Free Software future
From: |
Alexander Vdolainen |
Subject: |
Re: (Really) Free Software future |
Date: |
Mon, 14 Oct 2019 22:22:18 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1 |
On 10/14/19 10:11 PM, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 21:32 +0300, Alexander Vdolainen wrote:
>>> For example, no aspect of either GNOME or systemd are proprietary,
>>> using the common meaning of the term. Also, "lock-in" usually refers
>>> to software that prevents users from switching to an alternative; GNOME
>>> and systemd are certainly not lock-in.
>>
>> I'm afraid but I cannot agree with that. Actually with systemd design
>> you have 'lock-in', because in some cases you need to modify a source
>> code to support systemd (or you will face something like this -
>> https://superuser.com/questions/1372963/how-do-i-keep-systemd-from-killing-my-tmux-sessions).
>
> It's not lock-in because you don't have to use systemd. You can take a
> system that currently uses systemd and you can remove it and replace it
> with something else. It may be more or less effort, depending, but you
> _can_ do it, without violating licenses or losing access to any of your
> personal data.
Also I _can_ write a new kernel using existing code base...
>
> If you consider systemd "lock-in" then you *must* consider something
> like GNU libc "lock-in"; it's far more difficult to replace your libc
> than it is to switch away from systemd!
uclibc, musl ... but GNU libc doesn't require software to make some
modifications - that's the point.
>
>> Finally, correct me if I wrong, but GNOME 3.8 and newer requires
>> systemd to run, it's a lock-in isn't it ?
>
> No, because you don't need to run GNOME. You can't consider software
> "lock-in" just because it requires some other software, as long as you
> don't have to use either one. And you can't consider some software
> non-free just because it requires other free software: a large majority
> of free programs out there rely on some other free libraries for
> example.
yep
>
> Anyway, as I said this thread should be moved to gnu-misc-discuss.
ok, let's move it on.
>
--
Alexander Vdolainen,
Evil contractor.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, (continued)
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Jesse Gibbons, 2019/10/14
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Alexander Vdolainen, 2019/10/14
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, marinus.savoritias, 2019/10/14
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Stefan Huchler, 2019/10/14
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, marinus.savoritias, 2019/10/14
- Re: (Really) Free Software future in the light of systemd, Dmitry Alexandrov, 2019/10/21
- Re: (Really) Free Software future in the light of systemd, Jean Louis, 2019/10/21
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Paul Smith, 2019/10/14
- Re: (Really) Free Software future,
Alexander Vdolainen <=
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, marinus.savoritias, 2019/10/14
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Richard Stallman, 2019/10/14
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Svante Signell, 2019/10/15
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, marinus.savoritias, 2019/10/15
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Alexander Vdolainen, 2019/10/15
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Jean Louis, 2019/10/16
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2019/10/15
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Alexander Vdolainen, 2019/10/15
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, František Kučera, 2019/10/16
- Re: (Really) Free Software future, Svante Signell, 2019/10/16