www/distros common-distros.html

[Richard M. Stallman]

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Richard M. Stallman <rms>       11/01/30 15:49:34

Modified files:
        distros        : common-distros.html 

Log message:
        Say "GNU/Linux" in names of GNU/Linux distros where they say "Linux".
        Update about blobless Debian Squeeze.
        Other updates for clarity.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/distros/common-distros.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.19&r2=1.20

Patches:
Index: common-distros.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/distros/common-distros.html,v
retrieving revision 1.19
retrieving revision 1.20
diff -u -b -r1.19 -r1.20
--- common-distros.html 13 Jan 2011 14:52:32 -0000      1.19
+++ common-distros.html 30 Jan 2011 15:49:31 -0000      1.20
@@ -24,8 +24,8 @@
 our list of <a href="/distros/free-distros.html">free GNU/Linux
 distributions</a>.</p>
 
-<p>All of the distributions listed on this page fail to follow the
-guidelines in at least two important ways:</p>
+<p>Except where noted, all of the distributions listed on this page
+fail to follow the guidelines in at least two important ways:</p>
 
 <ul>
 <li><p>They do not have a policy of <em>only</em> including free
@@ -33,9 +33,9 @@
 them have no clear policy on what software they'll accept or reject at
 all.  The distributions that do have a policy unfortunately aren't
 strict enough, as explained below.</p></li>
-<li><p>The version of the kernel Linux that they distribute includes
-blobs: pieces of object code, distributed without source,
-usually to help operate some device.</p></li>
+<li><p>The kernel that they distribute (in most cases, Linux) includes
+<em>blobs</em>: pieces of object code distributed without source,
+usually firmware to run some device.</p></li>
 </ul>
 
 <p>Below are additional notes about some popular GNU/Linux
@@ -48,9 +48,9 @@
 all systems carefully before endorsing them.</p>
 
 <a id="Arch"></a>
-<h3>Arch</h3>
+<h3>Arch GNU/Linux</h3>
 
-<p>Arch has the two common issues listed above: there's no clear policy
+<p>Arch has the two usual problems: there's no clear policy
 about what software can be included, and nonfree blobs are shipped with
 their Linux kernel.  Arch also has no policy about not distributing
 nonfree software through their normal channels.</p>
@@ -58,22 +58,23 @@
 <a id="CentOS"></a>
 <h3>CentOS</h3>
 
-<p>We're not aware of problems in CentOS aside from the two listed
-above: there's no clear policy about what software can be included,
-and nonfree blobs are shipped with Linux.  Of course, with no firm
-policy in place, there might be other nonfree software included that
-we missed.</p>
+<p>We're not aware of problems in CentOS aside from the two usual ones:
+there's no clear policy about what software can be included,
+and nonfree blobs are shipped with Linux, the kernel.  Of course, with
+no firm policy in place, there might be other nonfree software
+included that we missed.</p>
 
 <a id="Debian"></a>
-<h3>Debian</h3>
+<h3>Debian GNU/Linux</h3>
 
 <p>Debian's Social Contract does say that all software in the main
-distribution will be free software.  Unfortunately, that's not always
-true in practice.  Debian has repeatedly made tacit or explicit
+distribution will be free software.  At present, that's not always
+true in practice: Debian has repeatedly made tacit or explicit
 exceptions for specific pieces of nonfree software, such as the blobs
-included in or accompanying Linux.  We're still hopeful that there
-won't be such exceptions in the future, but we can't turn a blind eye
-to the situation as it stands today.</p>
+included in or accompanying Linux.  The next release of Debian will
+reportedly move these blobs out of Linux.  That will be a substantial
+step towards a completely free distro, but won't get all the way
+there.</p>
 
 <p>Debian also provides a repository of nonfree software.  According
 to the project, this software is &ldquo;not part of the Debian
@@ -94,13 +95,13 @@
 Fedora from meeting the free system distribution guidelines.</p>
 
 <a id="Gentoo"></a>
-<h3>Gentoo</h3>
+<h3>Gentoo GNU/Linux</h3>
 
 <p>Gentoo makes it easy to install a number of nonfree programs through
 their primary package system.</p>
 
 <a id="Mandriva"></a>
-<h3>Mandriva</h3>
+<h3>Mandriva GNU/Linux</h3>
 
 <p>Mandriva does have a stated policy about what can be included in the
 main system.  It's based on Fedora's, which means that it also allows
@@ -112,13 +113,15 @@
 repositories.</p>
 
 <a id="openSUSE"></a>
-<h3>openSUSE</h3>
+<h3>openSUSE GNU/Linux</h3>
 
 <p>openSUSE offers its users access to a repository of nonfree
-software.</p>
+software.  This is an instance of
+how <a 
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.htmlopen-source-misses-the-point.html">
+"open" is weaker than "free"</a>.</p>
 
 <a id="RedHat"></a>
-<h3>Red Hat</h3>
+<h3>Red Hat GNU/Linux</h3>
 
 <p>Red Hat's enterprise distribution primarily follows the same
 licensing policies as Fedora, with one exception.  Thus, we don't
@@ -129,43 +132,45 @@
 <a id="Slackware"></a>
 <h3>Slackware</h3>
 
-<p>Slackware has the two problems listed above: there's no clear policy
-about what software can be included, and nonfree blobs are shipped with
-Linux.  It also ships with the nonfree image-viewing program xv.  Of
-course, with no firm policy in place, there might be other nonfree
-software included that we missed.</p>
+<p>Slackware has the two usual problems: there's no clear policy about
+what software can be included, and nonfree blobs are included in
+Linux, the kernel.  It also ships with the nonfree image-viewing
+program xv.  Of course, with no firm policy in place, there might be
+other nonfree software included that we missed.</p>
 
 <a id="SUSE"></a>
-<h3>SUSE</h3>
+<h3>SUSE GNU/Linux</h3>
 
-<p>Several nonfree software programs are available for download from
-SUSE's official FTP site.</p>
+<p>In addition to the usual two problens, several nonfree software
+programs are available for download from SUSE's official FTP site.</p>
 
 <a id="Ubuntu"></a>
-<h3>Ubuntu</h3>
+<h3>Ubuntu GNU/Linux</h3>
 
 <p>Ubuntu provides specific repositories of nonfree software, and
 Canonical expressly promotes and recommends nonfree software under the
-Ubuntu name in some of their distribution channels.  Even if you try
-to avoid all of that, the default application installer will advertise
-nonfree software to you.</p>
+Ubuntu name in some of their distribution channels.  Ubuntu offers the
+option to install only free packages, which means it also offers the
+option to install nonfree packages too.  In addition, the version of
+Linux included in Ubuntu contains firmware "blobs".</p>
 
 <a id="BSD"></a>
 <h3>What about BSD systems?</h3>
 
 <p>FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD all include instructions for obtaining
-nonfree programs in their ports system.</p>
-
-<p>BSD systems refer to proprietary drivers as &ldquo;blobs&rdquo; and
-some have policies against including these.  That is good, but
-unfortunately no BSD system has policies against proprietary binary-only
-firmware that might be loaded even by free drivers.</p>
+nonfree programs in their ports system.  In addition, their kernels
+includes nonfree firmware blobs.</p>
 
-<p>Nonfree firmwares in Linux are called &ldquo;blobs,&rdquo; but the
-meaning in BSD parlance is different, as above.  Thus, when BSD
-developers say their distributions contains no blobs, it is a
-miscommunication; they are talking about something else.</p>
+<p>Nonfree firmware programs in Linux are called &ldquo;blobs,&rdquo;
+and that's how we use the term.  In BSD parlance, the term
+&ldquo;blob&rdquo; means something else: a nonfree driver.  Some BSD
+distros have the policy of not including those.  That is the right
+policy, as regards drivers; but when the developers say these distros
+&ldquo;contain no blobs,&rdquo;, it causes a misunderstanding.  They
+are not taking about firmware blobs.</p>
 
+<p> No BSD distro has policies against proprietary binary-only
+firmware that might be loaded even by free drivers.</p>
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
@@ -192,7 +197,7 @@
 <p>
 Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2011/01/13 14:52:32 $
+$Date: 2011/01/30 15:49:31 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>