-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip />
> > I rephrase: how can you argue that a hand-crafted binary is not > > sufficiently modifiable to offer the freedom to study and adapt? > > How you can argue that a binary output by a compiler is not sufficiently > modifiable to offer the freedom to study and adapt? In that particular case, you've got the output of compiler, therefore the authors prefered form of modification is the "source", it's *really* got source, there was a before stage, it wasn't a hand crafted binary. I can see where you're coming from though. I think this is very much an edge case, and I doubt that there are *that many* people that would hand craft an elf binary without using a compiler chain. Of course, providing a binary only also limits which archs you can use it on, which you *might* be able to do given C/C++/ObjC/Fortran/SomethingGoesHere source. I wonder if I'm missing something, somewhere? Cheers, - -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCKK5XEh8oWxevnjQRAv6iAJ98/fBUj7Pquu/ry89nbaeJTiB2mgCdFjSf SDlxuZxM8FvzWPMA9wRzbn4= =7/N/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
