Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Dec 2007 16:32 UTC, submitted by lmvaz
OpenBSD Richard Stallman sent a message to OpenBSD-Misc, explaining why he doesn't recommend OpenBSD. "From what I have heard, OpenBSD does not contain non-free software (though I am not sure whether it contains any non-free firmware blobs). However, its ports system does suggest non-free programs, or at least so I was told when I looked for some BSD variant that I could recommend. I therefore exercise my freedom of speech by not including OpenBSD in the list of systems that I recommend to the public." His mail started a huge thread (that's just page 1) and since then he's under a blast of messages from Theo de Raadt and the OpenBSD users. De Raadt replied: "Richard, you are wrong. You said very clearly in your interview that the ports tree contains non-free software. It does not. It is just a scaffold of Makefiles containing URLs, and an occasional patch here or there. You are just plain wrong. And you are not enough of a man to admit that you are wrong. I may be unfriendly at times, but you are a power-misusing hypocritical liar who attacks projects that try harder than any others to only make free software available. Shame on you."
Thread beginning with comment 291666
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: lmao
by Bogtha on Mon 17th Dec 2007 18:02 UTC in reply to "lmao"
Bogtha
Member since:
2007-12-17

Unfortunately, it only highlights Theo as the hypocrite. The OpenBSD project itself considers the ports tree to contain the applications you can install through it. Straight from the FAQ:

Other browsers in the ports tree, include (in no particular order):
* Opera Commercial browser, i386 only (requires Linux emulation).


http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq8.html#Browsers

So the basis Theo uses to call Stallman a liar is a distinction so fine even the OpenBSD project itself doesn't make it!

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 23

RE[2]: lmao
by Oliver on Mon 17th Dec 2007 18:11 in reply to "RE: lmao"
Oliver Member since:
2006-07-15

If you don't get it, don't flame it. It's that easy, THERE IS NO NON-FREE SOFTWARE IN THE PORTS. Ports are just makefile, YOU, the very user, have to run the makefile, YOU are installing it and furthermore ports in OpenBSD aren't officially part of the supported OS. Maybe next time you should read the whole FAQ or use the system!

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4

RE[3]: lmao
by AdamW on Mon 17th Dec 2007 18:13 in reply to "RE[2]: lmao"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

But no-one ever claimed there *was* any non-free software in ports. RMS said it 'suggested' the use of non-free software. This is not the same thing at all.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 18

RE[3]: lmao
by gogglesguy on Mon 17th Dec 2007 18:27 in reply to "RE[2]: lmao"
gogglesguy Member since:
2007-08-10

That's totally not the point RMS was making... ofcourse if you actually read the messages in the mailinglist, or hell, even the title of this article,

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 5

RE[3]: lmao
by Bogtha on Mon 17th Dec 2007 19:38 in reply to "RE[2]: lmao"
Bogtha Member since:
2007-12-17

THERE IS NO NON-FREE SOFTWARE IN THE PORTS. Ports are just makefile


Read my comment. This definition of "the ports" as being the Makefiles only and not the software itself is a definition that OpenBSD itself doesn't use. Theo invented an arbitrary distinction just to call Stallman a liar. The OpenBSD FAQ itself states that Opera, well-known for being non-Free, is "in the ports tree", those exact words.

If OpenBSD had been using the definition in Theo's mail all along, then you might have a point, but they have not. It looks like Theo invented that narrower definition so that he could call Stallman a liar. Unfortunately for him, the OpenBSD's website is available to prove that isn't the definition used up until today.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 20