Re: (Really) Free Software future in the light of systemd

[Dmitry Alexandrov]

Stefan Huchler <address@hidden> wrote:
> If I write a program and it's elisp there is only as far as I know one 
> interpreter and all libs I use are also not replacable without rewriting code.

Even if put aside that we have at least two elisp interpreters alive: there is 
also GNU Guile; GNU Emacs is actually quite bad example to illustrate the 
systemd lock-in problem.  For many years it had had a divergent fork — XEmacs, 
and many non-core parts of GNU Emacs, like Gnus, still contain code that tries 
to be portable between them.

> So is all my programmes I ever wrote also not Free software because it's not 
> based on some very primitive Kernel Systemcalls (that have to be then not 
> even linux specific right?

While Linux® is indeed might be a very relevant example.  It’s a way more 
widespread; has software more critical that DE, like Wayland, that targets it 
exclusively; and since the advent of LLVM is basically the only effectively 
irreplaceable part of GNU left.

I wish open software (that how the standard-based software is properly called) 
advocates, which are now focused on systemd, would better turn their attention 
to Linux®.

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature