Re: (Really) Free Software future

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > > Sorry Richard, but it is really a vendor lock-in. As you know there is
  > > only one _upstream_ of systemd and that upstream is a company.

What vendor lock-in means is that there is only one version you can get
and you have to get it from a particular company, a vendor (meaning it has
sold you something).

It is possible to distribute modified versions of systemD.  I think
some already exist.  But even if they did not exist now, they could
exist.

Vendor lock-in in the true sense occurs only with nonfree software.
With a nonfree program, modified versions do not exist.

  > systemd binaries are dependent on systemd and replaces programs that
  > did not have such dependencies.

What does "systemD binaries" mean?
That expression would normally mean the binaries of systemD itself,
but it is clear you don't mean that.

  > There is my personal protest against the systemd's LGPL license. It is
  > service manager and not a special library that shall sacrifice freedom
  > in special cases.

How do other programs talk with systemD?  Do they link with it?
Communicate through pipes?

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)