Aryan Ameri writes: > OK you guys say that, OOo is bad software because they use csh, and they > use java to build it. Don't get me wrong, I am a true believer in free > software, but I guess sometimes, you have to see things from a different > point of view.
My main objection is not that csh and Java are unfree: there are Free implementations of both (though I doubt OOo builds with anything non-Sun). My main objection is that their use is evidence of bad engineering. > And in my opinion, using non free software in developing a software, > shouldn't disqualify it from being free software... A package that cannot be built without non-free software, as is almost certainly the case with OOo, is not very free (though a fully Free version could be derived from it). I will not install any software that I could not build from source if I wished. I could not build OOo from source because I will not install non-Free software and I am not interested enough in it to take on the task of removing the Java build dependency. > Besides, Linus is also using non free software to develop the > kernel. Does that also mean, that we should all abandon the Linux kernel, > and regard it as non free software? The kernel build system requires no non-free software. One can compile kernels and contribute to kernel development using only Free software. Using non-free software and making a package build-depend on it are two entirely different things. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
