Stefan Huchler <stefan.huch...@mail.de> wrote: > If I write a program and it's elisp there is only as far as I know one > interpreter and all libs I use are also not replacable without rewriting code.
Even if put aside that we have at least two elisp interpreters alive: there is also GNU Guile; GNU Emacs is actually quite bad example to illustrate the systemd lock-in problem. For many years it had had a divergent fork — XEmacs, and many non-core parts of GNU Emacs, like Gnus, still contain code that tries to be portable between them. > So is all my programmes I ever wrote also not Free software because it's not > based on some very primitive Kernel Systemcalls (that have to be then not > even linux specific right? While Linux® is indeed might be a very relevant example. It’s a way more widespread; has software more critical that DE, like Wayland, that targets it exclusively; and since the advent of LLVM is basically the only effectively irreplaceable part of GNU left. I wish open software (that how the standard-based software is properly called) advocates, which are now focused on systemd, would better turn their attention to Linux®.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
