Le 4 mai 2016 00:13:27 GMT+02:00, "J.B. Nicholson" <jbn@forestfield.org> a écrit :
Julien Kyou wrote:
Using GNU as a descriptor 'even in the absence of GNU for freedom
respecting distros' feels right to me, its not credit its a brand. GNU =
Freedom, Should be true.
GNU does nothing to stop hackers from porting it to run on nonfree kernels.
Hence today we have GNU/kWindows (the GNU OS running atop the kernel from
Microsoft Windows), GNU/kFreeBSD (the GNU OS running atop the kernel from
FreeBSD), and GNU/HURD (the GNU OS running atop the HURD microkernel).
There's no way to tell which of these are free software by looking at only
the name. We can be sure that the GNU portion is free software throughout,
but in the context of a distribution the kernel portion is unknown.
Distributions will sometimes take a free OS such as GNU, and make GNU run
atop a free kernel, and then include nonfree drivers. The total end-product
distributed to users is thus nonfree until the nonfree parts are removed. I
don't see how there could ever be a way of assuring a user's software
freedom by only mentioning GNU is included because one will always have to
do more work to know what else is included in the distribution. Even a
particular distribution that is free today can include nonfree software in
its repos, so as the FSF's approved distro list criteria says monitoring
this requires ongoing vigilance and a mindset of fixing freedom problems.