CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: James Turner <jturner> 11/09/23 15:05:56
Modified files:
philosophy : android-and-users-freedom.html
Log message:
Make links relative to gnu.org
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/android-and-users-freedom.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.4&r2=1.5
Patches:
Index: android-and-users-freedom.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/android-and-users-freedom.html,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -b -r1.4 -r1.5
--- android-and-users-freedom.html 23 Sep 2011 07:59:34 -0000 1.4
+++ android-and-users-freedom.html 23 Sep 2011 15:05:49 -0000 1.5
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
software that doesn't. By contrast, the idea of “open
source” focuses on how to develop code; it is a different current of
thought whose principal value is <a
-href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html";>code
+href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">code
quality rather than freedom</a>. Thus, the concern here is not whether Android
is
“open”, but whether it allows users to be free.</p>
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
and some applications. Linux aside, the software of Android versions
1 and 2 was mostly developed by Google; Google released it under the
Apache 2.0 license, which is a lax free software license without
-<a href="http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/copyleft.html";>copyleft</a>.</p>
+<a href="/copyleft/copyleft.html">copyleft</a>.</p>
<p>The version of Linux included in Android is not entirely free
software, since it contains nonfree “binary blobs” (just like
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@
generally come with Android are nonfree, too.</p>
<p>Android is very different from the <a
-href="http://www.gnu.org/gnu/the-gnu-project.html";>GNU/Linux operating
+href="/gnu/the-gnu-project.html">GNU/Linux operating
system</a> because it contains very little of GNU. Indeed, just about the
only component in common between Android and GNU/Linux is Linux, the kernel.
People who erroneously think “Linux” refers to the entire GNU/Linux
@@ -49,14 +49,14 @@
but not GNU; thus, Android and GNU/Linux are mostly different.</p>
<p>Within Android, Linux the kernel remains a separate program, with its
-source code under <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html";>GNU GPL
+source code under <a href="/licenses/gpl-2.0.html">GNU GPL
version 2</a>. To combine Linux with code under the Apache 2.0 license would
be copyright infringement, since GPL version 2 and Apache 2.0 are <a
-href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2";>incompatible</a>.
+href="/licenses/license-list.html#apache2">incompatible</a>.
Rumors that Google has somehow converted Linux to the Apache license are
erroneous; Google has no power to change the license on the code of Linux, and
did not try. If the authors of Linux allowed its use under <a
-href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html";>GPL version 3</a>,
+href="/licenses/gpl.html">GPL version 3</a>,
then that code could be combined with Apache-licensed code, with the
combination could be released under GPL version 3. But Linux has not
been released that way.</p>
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@
might intend to turn Android proprietary permanently; that the release
of some Android versions as free software may have been a temporary
ploy to get community assistance in improving a <a
-href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware";>proprietary
+href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">proprietary
software</a> product. Let us hope does not happen.</p>
<p>In any case, most of the source code of some versions of Android has
@@ -211,7 +211,7 @@
<p>Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2011/09/23 07:59:34 $
+$Date: 2011/09/23 15:05:49 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
