diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'examples/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | examples/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html | 271 |
1 files changed, 123 insertions, 148 deletions
diff --git a/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html b/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html index f104a7b1..e0a0ea95 100644 --- a/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html +++ b/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html @@ -1,6 +1,5 @@ <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd"> -<html> -<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman. +<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman. Free Software Foundation @@ -20,8 +19,7 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9 Cover design by Rob Myers. Cover photograph by Peter Hinely. - --> -<!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82 + --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82 texi2html was written by: Lionel Cons <Lionel.Cons@cern.ch> (original author) Karl Berry <karl@freefriends.org> @@ -29,17 +27,7 @@ texi2html was written by: and many others. Maintained by: Many creative people. Send bugs and suggestions to <texi2html-bug@nongnu.org> ---> -<head> -<title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 2. The GNU Project</title> - -<meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."> -<meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 2. The GNU Project"> -<meta name="resource-type" content="document"> -<meta name="distribution" content="global"> -<meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"> -<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> -<style type="text/css"> +--><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 2. The GNU Project</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 2. The GNU Project"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style type="text/css"> <!-- a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none} blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller} @@ -55,16 +43,10 @@ span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;} span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;} ul.toc {list-style: none} --> -</style> -<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../style.css"> - - -</head> - -<body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000"> +</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000"> <a name="GNU-Project"></a> -<header><div id="logo"><img src="../gnu.svg" height="100" width="100"></div><h1>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="The-GNU-Project"></a> +<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../gnu.svg" height="100" width="100"></a></div><h1>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="The-GNU-Project"></a> <h1 class="chapter"> 2. The GNU Project </h1> @@ -83,14 +65,14 @@ old as cooking. But we did it more than most. <p>The AI Lab used a timesharing operating system called <a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029"></a> ITS (the -Incompatible Timesharing System) that the lab’s staff +Incompatible Timesharing System) that the lab’s staff <a name="index-hackers"></a> hackers<a name="DOCF2" href="#FOOT2">(2)</a> had designed and written in assembler language for the Digital PDP-10, one of the large computers of the era. As a member of this community, an AI Lab staff system hacker, my job was to improve this system. </p> -<p>We did not call our software “free software,” because that +<p>We did not call our software “free software,” because that term did not yet exist; but that is what it was. Whenever people from another university or a company wanted to port and use a program, we gladly let them. If you saw someone using an unfamiliar and @@ -119,7 +101,7 @@ to maintain itself. (The book <cite>Hackers,</cite> by Steve Levy, describes these events, as well as giving a clear picture of this community in its prime.) When the AI Lab bought a new PDP-10 in 1982, its administrators -decided to use Digital’s nonfree timesharing system instead of +decided to use Digital’s nonfree timesharing system instead of <a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029-1"></a> ITS. </p> @@ -137,13 +119,13 @@ to help your neighbor. A cooperating community was forbidden. The rule made by the <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-damage-to-social-cohesion"></a> <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-users_0027-freedom"></a> -owners of proprietary software was, “If you +owners of proprietary software was, “If you share with your neighbor, you are a pirate. If you want any changes, -beg us to make them.” +beg us to make them.” </p> <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-proprietary-software-and"></a> -<p>The idea that the proprietary software social system—the system that -says you are not allowed to share or change software—is antisocial, +<p>The idea that the proprietary software social system—the system that +says you are not allowed to share or change software—is antisocial, that it is unethical, that it is simply wrong, may come as a surprise to some readers. But what else could we say about a system based on dividing the public and keeping users helpless? Readers who find the @@ -153,11 +135,11 @@ businesses. Software publishers have worked long and hard to convince people that there is only one way to look at the issue. </p> <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-1"></a> -<p>When software publishers talk about “enforcing” their -“rights” or “stopping piracy,” what they +<p>When software publishers talk about “enforcing” their +“rights” or “stopping piracy,” what they actually <em>say</em> is secondary. The real message of these statements is in the unstated assumptions they take for granted, which the public is -asked to accept without examination. Let’s therefore examine them. +asked to accept without examination. Let’s therefore examine them. </p> <p>One assumption is that software companies have an unquestionable natural right to own software and thus have power over all its users. (If @@ -166,11 +148,11 @@ public, we could not object.) Interestingly, the <a name="index-Constitution_002c-US"></a> US Constitution and legal tradition reject this view; copyright is not a natural right, -but an artificial government-imposed monopoly that limits the users’ +but an artificial government-imposed monopoly that limits the users’ natural right to copy. </p> <p>Another unstated assumption is that the only important thing about -software is what jobs it allows you to do—that we computer users +software is what jobs it allows you to do—that we computer users should not care what kind of society we are allowed to have. </p> <p>A third assumption is that we would have no usable software (or would @@ -187,8 +169,8 @@ free to modify programs to fit their needs, and free to share software, because helping other people is the basis of society. </p> <p>There is no room here for an extensive statement of the reasoning -behind this conclusion, so I refer the reader to the article “Why -Software Should Not Have Owners” (p. @refx{Why Free-pg}{). +behind this conclusion, so I refer the reader to the article “Why +Software Should Not Have Owners” (p. @refx{Why Free-pg}{). </p> <a name="A-Stark-Moral-Choice"></a> <h3 class="subheading"> A Stark Moral Choice </h3> @@ -237,7 +219,7 @@ operating system, you can do many things; without one, you cannot run the computer at all. With a free operating system, we could again have a community of cooperating <a name="index-hackers-2"></a> -hackers—and invite anyone to join. +hackers—and invite anyone to join. And anyone would be able to use a computer without starting out by conspiring to deprive his or her friends. </p> @@ -253,7 +235,7 @@ switch to it. The name GNU was chosen, following a hacker tradition, as a recursive acronym for <a name="index-GNU_002c-acronym"></a> -“GNU’s Not Unix.” +“GNU’s Not Unix.” </p> <a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts"></a> <p>An operating system does not mean just a kernel, barely enough to run @@ -274,21 +256,19 @@ Hillel:<a name="DOCF3" href="#FOOT3">(3)</a> </p> <blockquote class="smallquotation"><p> If I am not for myself, who will be for me?<br> If I am only for myself, what am I?<br> - If not now, when?<br> -</p></blockquote> + If not now, when?<br></p></blockquote> <p>The decision to start the GNU Project was based on a similar spirit. </p> <a name="Free-as-in-Freedom"></a> <h3 class="subheading"> Free as in Freedom </h3> -<p>The term “free software” is sometimes misunderstood—it +<p>The term “free software” is sometimes misunderstood—it has nothing to do with price. It is about freedom. Here, therefore, is the definition of free software. </p> <p>A program is free software, for you, a particular user, if: -</p><ul> -<li> +</p><ul><li> You have the freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose. </li><li> @@ -306,11 +286,9 @@ fee. You have the freedom to distribute modified versions of the program, so that the community can benefit from your improvements. -</li></ul> - -<a name="index-development_002c-fundraising"></a> +</li></ul><a name="index-development_002c-fundraising"></a> <a name="index-selling_002c-free-software"></a> -<p>Since “free” refers to freedom, not to price, there is no +<p>Since “free” refers to freedom, not to price, there is no contradiction between selling copies and free software. In fact, the freedom to sell copies is crucial: collections of free software sold on CD-ROMs are important for the community, and selling them is an @@ -319,13 +297,13 @@ Therefore, a program which people are not free to include on these collections is not free software. </p> <a name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-unambiguous-translations-of"></a> -<p>Because of the ambiguity of “free,” people have long +<p>Because of the ambiguity of “free,” people have long looked for alternatives, but no one has found a better term. The English language has more words and nuances than any other, but it -lacks a simple, unambiguous, word that means “free,” as in -freedom—“unfettered” being the word that comes closest in -meaning. Such alternatives as “liberated,” -“freedom,” and “open” have either the wrong +lacks a simple, unambiguous, word that means “free,” as in +freedom—“unfettered” being the word that comes closest in +meaning. Such alternatives as “liberated,” +“freedom,” and “open” have either the wrong meaning or some other disadvantage. </p> <a name="GNU-Software-and-the-GNU-System"></a> @@ -367,7 +345,7 @@ creating a new software-sharing community. <p>However, Professor <a name="index-Winston_002c-Patrick"></a> Winston, then the head of the MIT AI -Lab, kindly invited me to keep using the lab’s facilities. +Lab, kindly invited me to keep using the lab’s facilities. </p> <a name="The-First-Steps"></a> <h3 class="subheading"> The First Steps </h3> @@ -375,7 +353,7 @@ Lab, kindly invited me to keep using the lab’s facilities. <a name="index-Free-University-Compiler-Kit-_0028VUCK_0029"></a> <p>Shortly before beginning the GNU Project, I heard about the Free University Compiler Kit, also known as VUCK. (The Dutch word for -“free” is written with a <em>v.</em>) This was a compiler designed +“free” is written with a <em>v.</em>) This was a compiler designed to handle multiple languages, including C and <a name="index-Pascal"></a> @@ -407,7 +385,7 @@ space, while the available 68000 Unix system would only allow 64k. </p> <p>I then realized that the Pastel compiler functioned by parsing the entire input file into a syntax tree, converting the whole syntax tree -into a chain of “instructions,” and then generating the +into a chain of “instructions,” and then generating the whole output file, without ever freeing any storage. At this point, I concluded I would have to write a new compiler from scratch. That new compiler is now known as @@ -444,10 +422,10 @@ the question was, what would I say to them? </p> <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for"></a> -<p>I could have said, “Find a friend who is on the net and who will make -a copy for you.” Or I could have done what I did with the original -PDP-10 Emacs: tell them, “Mail me a tape and a SASE (self-addressed -stamped envelope), and I will mail it back with Emacs on it.” But I +<p>I could have said, “Find a friend who is on the net and who will make +a copy for you.” Or I could have done what I did with the original +PDP-10 Emacs: tell them, “Mail me a tape and a SASE (self-addressed +stamped envelope), and I will mail it back with Emacs on it.” But I had no job, and I was looking for ways to make money from free software. So I announced that I would mail a tape to whoever wanted one, for a fee of $150. In this way, I started a free software @@ -482,14 +460,14 @@ were no more free software than Unix was. <a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software"></a> <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-paradox-of-permissive-license"></a> <p>The developers of the X Window System did not consider this a -problem—they expected and intended this to happen. Their goal was -not freedom, just “success,” defined as “having many -users.” They did not care whether these users had freedom, only +problem—they expected and intended this to happen. Their goal was +not freedom, just “success,” defined as “having many +users.” They did not care whether these users had freedom, only about having many of them. </p> <p>This led to a paradoxical situation where two different ways of counting the amount of freedom gave different answers to the question, -“Is this program free?” If you judged based on the freedom +“Is this program free?” If you judged based on the freedom provided by the distribution terms of the MIT release, you would say that X was free software. But if you measured the freedom of the average user of X, you would have to say it was @@ -504,7 +482,7 @@ versions that came with Unix systems, not the free version. <p>The goal of GNU was to give users freedom, not just to be popular. So we needed to use distribution terms that would prevent GNU software from being turned into proprietary software. The method we use is -called “copyleft.”<a name="DOCF4" href="#FOOT4">(4)</a> +called “copyleft.”<a name="DOCF4" href="#FOOT4">(4)</a> </p> <p>Copyleft uses copyright law, but flips it over to serve the opposite of its usual purpose: instead of a means for restricting a program, it @@ -512,18 +490,18 @@ becomes a means for keeping the program free. </p> <p>The central idea of copyleft is that we give everyone permission to run the program, copy the program, modify the program, and distribute -modified versions—but not permission to add restrictions of their -own. Thus, the crucial freedoms that define “free -software” are guaranteed to everyone who has a copy; they become +modified versions—but not permission to add restrictions of their +own. Thus, the crucial freedoms that define “free +software” are guaranteed to everyone who has a copy; they become inalienable rights. </p> <p>For an effective copyleft, modified versions must also be free. This ensures that work based on ours becomes available to our community if it is published. When programmers who have jobs as programmers volunteer to improve GNU software, it is copyleft that prevents their -employers from saying, “You can’t share those changes, because +employers from saying, “You can’t share those changes, because we are going to use them to make our proprietary version of the -program.” +program.” <a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-2"></a> </p> <p>The requirement that changes must be free is essential if we want to @@ -570,7 +548,7 @@ Emacs tape distribution business; later it extended this by adding other free software (both GNU and non-GNU) to the tape, and by selling free manuals as well. </p> -<p>Most of the FSF’s income used to come from sales of copies of free +<p>Most of the FSF’s income used to come from sales of copies of free software and of other related services (CD-ROMs of source code, CD-ROMs with binaries, nicely printed manuals, all with the freedom to redistribute and modify), and @@ -578,10 +556,10 @@ redistribute and modify), and <a name="index-FSF_002c-Deluxe-Distributions"></a> <a name="index-FSF_002c-fundraising"></a> Deluxe Distributions (distributions for -which we built the whole collection of software for the customer’s +which we built the whole collection of software for the customer’s choice of platform). Today the FSF still sells manuals and other -gear, but it gets the bulk of its funding from members’ dues. You +gear, but it gets the bulk of its funding from members’ dues. You can join the FSF at <a href="http://fsf.org/join">http://fsf.org/join</a>. </p> <p>Free Software Foundation employees have written and maintained a @@ -616,7 +594,7 @@ goal. <p>The free software philosophy rejects a specific widespread business practice, but it is not against business. When businesses respect the -users’ freedom, we wish them success. +users’ freedom, we wish them success. </p> <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-1"></a> <a name="index-selling_002c-free-software-1"></a> @@ -642,16 +620,16 @@ software products. <a name="index-_0060_0060open_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term"></a> <a name="index-traps_002c-_0060_0060open-source_0027_0027"></a> <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e"></a> -<p>Watch out, though—a number of companies that associate themselves -with the term “open source” actually base their business +<p>Watch out, though—a number of companies that associate themselves +with the term “open source” actually base their business on nonfree software that works with free software. These are not free software companies, they are proprietary software companies whose products tempt users away from freedom. They call these programs -“value-added packages,” which shows the values they +“value-added packages,” which shows the values they would like us to adopt: convenience above freedom. If we value freedom more, we should <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-1"></a> -call them “freedom-subtracted” packages. +call them “freedom-subtracted” packages. <a name="index-Free-Software-Foundation-_0028FSF_0029-_0028see-also-FSF_0029-1"></a> <a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-1"></a> </p> @@ -661,10 +639,10 @@ call them “freedom-subtracted” packages. <p>The principal goal of GNU is to be free software. Even if GNU had no technical advantage over Unix, it would have a social advantage, allowing users to cooperate, and an ethical advantage, respecting the -user’s freedom. +user’s freedom. </p> <p>But it was natural to apply the known standards of good practice to -the work—for example, dynamically allocating data structures to avoid +the work—for example, dynamically allocating data structures to avoid arbitrary fixed size limits, and handling all the possible 8-bit codes wherever that made sense. </p> @@ -683,14 +661,14 @@ counterparts in reliability and speed. <h3 class="subheading"> Donated Computers </h3> <a name="index-development_002c-contributions-and-donations"></a> -<p>As the GNU Project’s reputation grew, people began offering to donate +<p>As the GNU Project’s reputation grew, people began offering to donate machines running Unix to the project. These were very useful, because the easiest way to develop components of GNU was to do it on a Unix system, and replace the components of that system one by one. But they raised an ethical issue: whether it was right for us to have a copy of Unix at all. </p> -<p>Unix was (and is) proprietary software, and the GNU Project’s +<p>Unix was (and is) proprietary software, and the GNU Project’s philosophy said that we should not use proprietary software. But, applying the same reasoning that leads to the conclusion that violence in self defense is justified, I concluded that it was legitimate to @@ -699,7 +677,7 @@ replacement that would help others stop using the proprietary package. </p> <p>But, even if this was a justifiable evil, it was still an evil. Today we no longer have any copies of Unix, because we have replaced them -with free operating systems. If we could not replace a machine’s +with free operating systems. If we could not replace a machine’s operating system with a free one, we replaced the machine instead. </p> <a name="The-GNU-Task-List"></a> @@ -716,14 +694,14 @@ List. In addition to missing Unix components, we listed various other useful software and documentation projects that, we thought, a truly complete system ought to have. </p> -<p>Today,<a name="DOCF7" href="#FOOT7">(7)</a> hardly any Unix components are left in the GNU Task List—those +<p>Today,<a name="DOCF7" href="#FOOT7">(7)</a> hardly any Unix components are left in the GNU Task List—those jobs had been done, aside from a few inessential ones. But the list -is full of projects that some might call “applications.” +is full of projects that some might call “applications.” Any program that appeals to more than a narrow class of users would be a useful thing to add to an operating system. </p> <a name="index-games_002c-Unix-compatibility-and"></a> -<p>Even games are included in the task list—and have been since the +<p>Even games are included in the task list—and have been since the beginning. <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-games-and"></a> Unix included games, so naturally GNU should too. But @@ -754,7 +732,7 @@ strategy. <p>The C library does a generic job; every proprietary system or compiler comes with a C library. Therefore, to make our C library available only to free software would not have given free software any -advantage—it would only have discouraged use of our library. +advantage—it would only have discouraged use of our library. </p> <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-1"></a> <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-C-Library-_0028see-also-GNU_0029-1"></a> @@ -808,8 +786,8 @@ adding up to a major advantage for further free software development. <a name="index-developers_002c-incentive-for"></a> <a name="index-Raymond_002c-Eric"></a> <p>Eric Raymond<a name="DOCF9" href="#FOOT9">(9)</a>). - says that “Every good work of software -starts by scratching a developer’s personal itch.”<a name="DOCF10" href="#FOOT10">(10)</a> Maybe that happens sometimes, but many + says that “Every good work of software +starts by scratching a developer’s personal itch.”<a name="DOCF10" href="#FOOT10">(10)</a> Maybe that happens sometimes, but many essential pieces of <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a> GNU software were developed in order to have a @@ -826,7 +804,7 @@ because a Unix-like system needs a shell, and <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-tar"></a> GNU tar because a Unix-like system needs a tar program. The same is true for my own -programs—the +programs—the <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029"></a> GNU C compiler, <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-2"></a> @@ -885,14 +863,14 @@ happened. <p>Since each component of the GNU system was implemented on a Unix system, each component could run on Unix systems long before a complete GNU system existed. Some of these programs became popular, -and users began extending them and porting them—to the various +and users began extending them and porting them—to the various incompatible versions of Unix, and sometimes to other systems as well. </p> <p>The process made these programs much more powerful, and attracted both funds and contributors to the GNU Project. But it probably also delayed completion of a minimal working system by several years, as <a name="index-developers_002c-GNU-Project-1"></a> -GNU developers’ time was put into maintaining these ports and adding +GNU developers’ time was put into maintaining these ports and adding features to the existing components, rather than moving on to write one missing component after another. <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-GNU-Project-development-and-1"></a> @@ -935,11 +913,11 @@ stretched on for many years. <a name="index-Hurd_002c-original-name-of"></a> <a name="index-Alix"></a> <p>The GNU kernel was not originally supposed to be called the Hurd. Its -original name was Alix—named after the woman who was my sweetheart at +original name was Alix—named after the woman who was my sweetheart at the time. She, a Unix system administrator, had pointed out how her name would fit a common naming pattern for Unix system versions; as a -joke, she told her friends, “Someone should name a kernel after -me.” I said nothing, but decided to surprise her with a kernel +joke, she told her friends, “Someone should name a kernel after +me.” I said nothing, but decided to surprise her with a kernel named Alix. </p> <p>It did not stay that way. @@ -947,7 +925,7 @@ named Alix. Michael (now Thomas) Bushnell, the main <a name="index-developers_002c-_0028see-also-programmers_0029-1"></a> developer of the kernel, preferred the name Hurd, and redefined Alix -to refer to a certain part of the kernel—the part that would trap +to refer to a certain part of the kernel—the part that would trap system calls and handle them by sending messages to Hurd servers. </p> <p>Later, Alix and I broke up, and she changed her name; @@ -965,7 +943,7 @@ she did have the chance to find a kernel named after her. <a name="Linux-and-GNU_002fLinux"></a> <h3 class="subheading"> Linux and GNU/Linux </h3> -<p>The GNU Hurd is not suitable for production use, and we don’t know +<p>The GNU Hurd is not suitable for production use, and we don’t know if it ever will be. The capability-based design has problems that result directly from the flexibility of the design, and it is not clear solutions exist. @@ -1013,7 +991,7 @@ so that Linux and <a name="index-XFree86"></a> XFree86 can support new hardware. We have complete free systems today, but we will not have them tomorrow if we cannot -support tomorrow’s computers. +support tomorrow’s computers. </p> <p>There are two ways to cope with this problem. Programmers can do reverse engineering to figure out how to support the hardware. The @@ -1022,7 +1000,7 @@ as our numbers increase, secrecy of specifications will become a self-defeating policy. </p> <p>Reverse engineering is a big job; will we have programmers with -sufficient determination to undertake it? Yes—if we have built up a +sufficient determination to undertake it? Yes—if we have built up a strong feeling that free software is a matter of principle, and nonfree drivers are intolerable. And will large numbers of us spend extra money, or even a little extra time, so we can use free drivers? @@ -1038,11 +1016,11 @@ for machines so that coreboot can support them.] <a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-libraries"></a> <a name="index-developers_002c-traps-for"></a> <p>A nonfree library that runs on free operating systems acts as a trap -for free software developers. The library’s attractive features are +for free software developers. The library’s attractive features are the bait; if you use the library, you fall into the trap, because your program cannot usefully be part of a free operating system. (Strictly speaking, we could include your program, but it -won’t <em>run</em> with the library missing.) Even worse, if +won’t <em>run</em> with the library missing.) Even worse, if a program that uses the proprietary library becomes popular, it can lure other unsuspecting programmers into the trap. </p> @@ -1072,9 +1050,9 @@ KDE. because we could not use the library. However, some commercial distributors of GNU/Linux systems who were not strict about sticking with free software added KDE to their -systems—producing a system with more capabilities, but less freedom. +systems—producing a system with more capabilities, but less freedom. The KDE group was actively encouraging more -programmers to use Qt, and millions of new “Linux users” +programmers to use Qt, and millions of new “Linux users” had never been exposed to the idea that there was a problem in this. The situation appeared grim. </p> @@ -1089,7 +1067,7 @@ GNOME and Harmony. <a name="index-Red-Hat-Software"></a> <a name="index-C_002b_002b_002c-language"></a> <p>GNOME, the GNU Network Object Model Environment, is -GNU’s desktop project. Started in 1997 by Miguel de Icaza, and +GNU’s desktop project. Started in 1997 by Miguel de Icaza, and developed with the support of Red Hat Software, GNOME set out to provide similar desktop facilities, but using free software exclusively. It has technical @@ -1103,7 +1081,7 @@ possible to run KDE software without using Qt. <p>In November 1998, the developers of Qt announced a change of license which, when carried out, should make Qt free software. There is no way to be sure, but I think that this was partly due to the -community’s firm response to the problem that Qt posed when it was +community’s firm response to the problem that Qt posed when it was nonfree. (The new license is inconvenient and inequitable, so it remains desirable to avoid using Qt.) </p> @@ -1139,12 +1117,12 @@ But each of these methods works only sometimes; when both fail, a patent may force all free software to lack some feature that users want. What will we do when this happens? </p> -<p>Those of us who value free software for freedom’s sake will stay with +<p>Those of us who value free software for freedom’s sake will stay with free software anyway. We will manage to get work done without the patented features. But those who value free software because they expect it to be technically superior are likely to call it a failure when a patent holds it back. Thus, while it is useful to talk about -the practical effectiveness of the “bazaar” model of +the practical effectiveness of the “bazaar” model of development, and the reliability and power of some free software, we must not stop there. We must talk about freedom and principle. </p> @@ -1154,7 +1132,7 @@ we must not stop there. We must talk about freedom and principle. <a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029"></a> <a name="index-manuals_002c-need-for"></a> <p>The biggest deficiency in our free operating systems is not in the -software—it is the lack of good free manuals that we can include in +software—it is the lack of good free manuals that we can include in our systems. Documentation is an essential part of any software package; when an important free software package does not come with a good free manual, that is a major gap. We have many such gaps today. @@ -1167,28 +1145,28 @@ and on paper, so that the manual can accompany every copy of the program. </p> <p>Permission for modification is crucial too. As a general rule, I -don’t believe that it is essential for people to have permission to -modify all sorts of articles and books. For example, I don’t think +don’t believe that it is essential for people to have permission to +modify all sorts of articles and books. For example, I don’t think you or I are obliged to give permission to modify articles like this one, which describe our actions and our views. </p> <p>But there is a particular reason why the freedom to modify is crucial for documentation for free software. When people exercise their right to modify the software, and add or change its features, if they are -conscientious they will change the manual, too—so they can +conscientious they will change the manual, too—so they can provide accurate and usable documentation with the modified program. A nonfree manual, which does not allow programmers to be conscientious -and finish the job, does not fill our community’s needs. +and finish the job, does not fill our community’s needs. </p> <p>Some kinds of limits on how modifications are done pose no problem. -For example, requirements to preserve the original author’s copyright +For example, requirements to preserve the original author’s copyright notice, the distribution terms, or the list of authors, are OK. It is also no problem to require modified versions to include notice that they were modified, even to have entire sections that may not be deleted or changed, as long as these sections deal with nontechnical topics. These kinds of restrictions are not a problem because they -don’t stop the conscientious programmer from adapting the manual to -fit the modified program. In other words, they don’t block the free +don’t stop the conscientious programmer from adapting the manual to +fit the modified program. In other words, they don’t block the free software community from making full use of the manual. </p> <p>However, it must be possible to modify all the <em>technical</em> content of @@ -1215,7 +1193,7 @@ systems such as <a name="index-Debian-GNU_002fLinux"></a> Debian GNU/Linux and <a name="index-Red-Hat-Linux-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term_0029"></a> -Red Hat “Linux.” +Red Hat “Linux.” Free software has developed such practical advantages that users are flocking to it for purely practical reasons. </p> @@ -1238,26 +1216,26 @@ our community. We need to do both, and we need to keep the two efforts in balance. </p> <a name="g_t_0060_0060Open-Source_0027_0027"></a> -<h3 class="subheading"> “Open Source” </h3> +<h3 class="subheading"> “Open Source” </h3> <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of"></a> <p>Teaching new users about freedom became more difficult in 1998, when a -part of the community decided to stop using the term “free -software” and say “open source software” +part of the community decided to stop using the term “free +software” and say “open source software” instead. </p> <p>Some who favored this term aimed to avoid the confusion of -“free” with “gratis”—a valid goal. Others, +“free” with “gratis”—a valid goal. Others, however, aimed to set aside the spirit of principle that had motivated the free software movement and the GNU Project, and to appeal instead to executives and business users, many of whom hold an ideology that places profit above freedom, above community, above principle. Thus, -the rhetoric of “open source” focuses on the potential to +the rhetoric of “open source” focuses on the potential to make high-quality, powerful software, but shuns the ideas of freedom, community, and principle. </p> <a name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029"></a> -<p>The “Linux” magazines are a clear example of this—they +<p>The “Linux” magazines are a clear example of this—they are filled with advertisements for proprietary software that works with GNU/Linux. When the next <a name="index-Motif-_0028see-also-LessTif_0029-1"></a> @@ -1276,10 +1254,10 @@ even worse. <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-open-source-v_002e-free-software"></a> <a name="index-open-source_002c-essential-difference-between-free-software-and"></a> <a name="index-free-software_002c-essential-difference-between-open-source-and"></a> -<p>“Free software” and “open source” describe the +<p>“Free software” and “open source” describe the same category of software, more or less, but say different things about the software, and about values. The GNU Project continues to -use the term “free software,” to express the idea that +use the term “free software,” to express the idea that freedom, not just technology, is important. <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-1"></a> </p> @@ -1287,8 +1265,8 @@ freedom, not just technology, is important. <h3 class="subheading"> Try! </h3> <a name="index-Yoda"></a> -<p>Yoda’s aphorism (“There is no ‘try’”) sounds -neat, but it doesn’t work for me. I have done most of my work while +<p>Yoda’s aphorism (“There is no ‘try’”) sounds +neat, but it doesn’t work for me. I have done most of my work while anxious about whether I could do the job, and unsure that it would be enough to achieve the goal if I did. But I tried anyway, because there was no one but me between the enemy and my city. Surprising @@ -1296,56 +1274,55 @@ myself, I have sometimes succeeded. </p> <p>Sometimes I failed; some of my cities have fallen. Then I found another threatened city, and got ready for another battle. Over time, -I’ve learned to look for threats and put myself between them and my +I’ve learned to look for threats and put myself between them and my city, calling on other <a name="index-hackers-4"></a> hackers to come and join me. </p> -<p>Nowadays, often I’m not the only one. It is a relief and a joy when I +<p>Nowadays, often I’m not the only one. It is a relief and a joy when I see a regiment of hackers digging in to hold the line, and I realize, -this city may survive—for now. But the dangers are greater each +this city may survive—for now. But the dangers are greater each year, and now Microsoft has explicitly targeted our community. We -can’t take the future of freedom for granted. Don’t take it for +can’t take the future of freedom for granted. Don’t take it for granted! If you want to keep your freedom, you must be prepared to defend it. <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-future-challenges-1"></a> <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-1"></a> <a name="index-GNU-Project-_0028see-also-GNU_0029-1"></a> </p><div class="footnote"> -<hr> -<h3>Footnotes</h3> +<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3> <h3><a name="FOOT2" href="#DOCF2">(2)</a></h3> <p>The use of <a name="index-_0060_0060hacker_002c_0027_0027-actual-meaning-of-term-_0028see-also-_0060_0060cracker_0027_0027_0029"></a> -“hacker” to mean “security breaker” is a confusion on the part of +“hacker” to mean “security breaker” is a confusion on the part of the mass media. We hackers refuse to recognize that meaning, and continue using the word to mean someone who loves to program, someone who enjoys playful cleverness, or the combination of the two. See my -article, “On Hacking,” at +article, “On Hacking,” at <a href="http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html">http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html</a>. </p><h3><a name="FOOT3" href="#DOCF3">(3)</a></h3> <p>As an -Atheist, I don’t follow any religious leaders, but I sometimes find I +Atheist, I don’t follow any religious leaders, but I sometimes find I admire something one of them has said. </p><h3><a name="FOOT4" href="#DOCF4">(4)</a></h3> <p>In 1984 or 1985, <a name="index-Hopkins_002c-Don"></a> Don Hopkins (a very imaginative fellow) mailed me a letter. On the envelope he had written -several amusing sayings, including this one: “Copyleft—all rights -reversed.” I used the word “copyleft” to name the distribution +several amusing sayings, including this one: “Copyleft—all rights +reversed.” I used the word “copyleft” to name the distribution concept I was developing at the time. </p><h3><a name="FOOT5" href="#DOCF5">(5)</a></h3> <p>We now use the <a name="index-FDL-_0028see-also-both-manuals-and-documentation_0029"></a> GNU Free -Documentation License (p. @refx{FDL-pg}{ +Documentation License (p. @refx{FDL-pg}{ </p><h3><a name="FOOT6" href="#DOCF6">(6)</a></h3> -<p>“Bourne Again Shell” is a play on the name “Bourne -Shell,” which was the usual shell on Unix. +<p>“Bourne Again Shell” is a play on the name “Bourne +Shell,” which was the usual shell on Unix. </p><h3><a name="FOOT7" href="#DOCF7">(7)</a></h3> <p>That was written in 1998. In 2009 we no longer maintain a long -task list. The community develops free software so fast that we can’t +task list. The community develops free software so fast that we can’t even keep track of it all. Instead, we have a list of High Priority Projects, a much shorter list of projects we really want to encourage people to write. @@ -1354,13 +1331,11 @@ people to write. the GNU Lesser General Public License, to avoid giving the idea that all libraries ought to use it. </p><h3><a name="FOOT9" href="#DOCF9">(9)</a></h3> -<p>Eric Raymond is a prominent open source advocate; see “Why Open -Source Misses the Point” (p. @refx{OS Misses Point-pg}{ +<p>Eric Raymond is a prominent open source advocate; see “Why Open +Source Misses the Point” (p. @refx{OS Misses Point-pg}{ </p><h3><a name="FOOT10" href="#DOCF10">(10)</a></h3> -<p>Eric S. Raymond, <cite>The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and +<p>Eric S. Raymond, <cite>The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary,</cite> rev. ed. (Sebastopol, -Calif.: O’Reilly, 2001), p. 23. +Calif.: O’Reilly, 2001), p. 23. </p></div> -<hr size="2"> -</body> -</html> +<hr size="2"></section></body></html> |