Re: about GNU Hurd

[arnuld]

> On 8/28/07, Xavier Maillard <address@hidden> wrote:

> I do not agree Richard. Having the Hurd is essential in that a)
> it would be a GPLv3 project thus protecting user freedom and
> avoiding tivoization and b) would be a GNU (project and kernel)
> and thus would give some guaranties about project quality and
> future.
>


Xavier, this exactly is the same thing i discusses last month, did not
remember i discussed it here or at Debian Hurd mailing list. RMS has
no interest in Hurd.He got stuck with GPLv2 Linux kernel. I think he
has forgotten the fact that there is no GNU OS, most users do not know
about GNU, everywhere is Linux, even saying it GNU/Linux will not
solve any problem because then you deal with effect, not with the
cause. I have to use word Linux to make people understand i am talking
about Linux Operating System, they don't know GNU. majority of users
don't give a damn about Freedom. i talked with many of the users and i
have not found any single user yet who says i will use Free softwares.
 they use Skype and RealPlayer on Linux, what is GNU ?

whoever is going to change this phenomenon  will have to deal with the
cause, not effect. To handle the cause we have only one way, The GNU
OS a.k.a. Hurd and at the pace FSF is developing Hurd, it will take
another 2 decades to get out the 0.1 version and that will be 0.1
version, just that not much. Linus Torvalds does not like GPL
(specifically version 3) and that helps a lot to crush the Free
Software Community using M$-Novell deals and Sun boasting Open Source
Java with no modification and no distribution clauses of JRE
distribution license. We do not have much money to deal with
corporates but we 2 powerful tools to take it down:

1.) Free Software Hackers
2.) Copyleft License

and we need to exploit the 2 to fullest to achieve what we want, a
Free OS, the GNU OS and that will deal with cause not effects, so we
know where to spend our time and resources


> Linux is ok as it is a free software but if they stick with GPLv2
> only, it is a no-no for long term and mainly depends on the "bon
> vouloir" of one person (or a small group of people). GNU's target
> is mainly philosophic and target freedom, linux does not (it just
> has to just work). Having something working is one thing, but
> having something working plus the freedom is much more better.

to be true, we do not have any OS that supports and spreads Free
Software philosophy, that is the Harsh truth-- we do not have Libre
OS, not Linux, i have seen lots of Linux magazines  filled with
proprietary softwares advertisements amd Linus himself supports the
use of proprietary softwares.

RMS has to realize the this fact. He is a good guy and he is the one
who made Linux possible but being a good guy and being able to
understand some requirements are two very different things and that is
why we hear form people Linus Torvalds created Linux Operating System,
what's GNU ?

we really need  an OS that supports Free Software Philosophy ...
I,myself, need it. thanks for spending so much precious time of yours
in reading my opinions :)



-- 
http://arnuld.blogspot.com/