Linux

48372 readers

1665 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

145

Nonfree software found in GNU Boot releases again, many distros affected. (savannah.gnu.org)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] anamethatisnt 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That question is kind a rabbit hole and not one I feel confident in going down.

Free as in freedom, not as in free beer.
The real world implications of non-free software is that other's can't run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software.

I like having computing alternatives that are free from corporate control and believe that the hardliners like FSF helps us keep those alternatives alive. I realise that those alternatives are in many ways worse and that a lot of hardware today requires the vendor blobs to work. When/If corporations push their control even further I want those alternatives to be around.

And you really should pay for winrar. ;-)

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

@anamethatisnt Yea, so you think the authors are not entitled to specify how their software is used? This is where I have a major disconnect with Richard Stallman.

[–] anamethatisnt 2 points 1 month ago

I believe that both proprietary non-free systems and fully free systems can exist and that having licensing alternatives like GPL, LGPL and MIT gives the developer options for specifying how their software is to be used.

The movement towards using MIT or LGPL instead of the full GPL for libraries thus allowing the developers using the libraries the freedom to choose what license their software should use is one I can stand behind.

If someone builds a FLOSS turbotax competitor and don't want anyone to use their hard work and fork it into a commercial and proprietary product then I believe there should be a license for that.
If they rather earn money from it and copyrights their code instead that is also their prerogative.
The middle-ground where they create a free turbotax competitor with a license that allows others to fork it into a proprietary software should also be possible - although I personally don't see the allure.

[–] Ledivin 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They are free to use whatever license they want, but I am similarly free to avoid using software under non-FOSS licenses.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago

@Ledivin and if your wifi doesn't work as a result, I'm totally ok with that too.