Subject: Re: GNU License for Hardware
From: Ben_Tilly@trepp.com
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 13:12:26 -0400


(Lists trimmed)
> craig@jcb-sc.com writes:
>  > Note that the "GNU/Linux campaign", as I am describing RMS's efforts
>  > here, may well have been *designed* to have a positive effect on long-term
>  > efforts to work on GNU, but might have been *executed* such that it
>  > did not.
>
> Exactly my point.  And as RMS continues this campaign, it continues to
> hurt him.  On the other hand, creating a GNU distribution of Linux,
> would be a positive step forward that takes nothing from anyone.
>
Uh huh...

> He could even start with Debian, and fix some of their major gaffes,
> like not using RPMs, and like not making it obvious how to get the
> source (why doesn't Debian have a "source-get" command which retrieves
> the exact source matching the installed package?)

He is way ahead of you.  Furthermore Debian fans do NOT agree with you
that not using RPMs is a bad thing.  Personally I have to admit to liking
.debs over RPMs.  But I do agree on the source issue.  I happen to know
some of the reasons why it has not happened (eg many packages do
not have source available, how do you verify that the versions actually
match), but it is still irritating.

Incidentally not only is Debian officially affiliated with the FSF (which is
why my login screen says Debian GNU/Linux), but there is also a move
to produce a Linux-free version of Debian using the Hurd instead of
the Linux kernel.

Cheers,
Ben