[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gNewSense-users] firefox in search of a solution revisited [long ma

From: MJ Ray
Subject: Re: [gNewSense-users] firefox in search of a solution revisited [long mail]
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 02:34:26 +0000
User-agent: Heirloom mailx 12.1 6/15/06

jeff <address@hidden> wrote:
> [...] I believe those build options 
> above yank everything they require you to yank. You can still distribute the 
> source package fine (as I understand it).

Last time I tried them (some time ago), those build options left one
without a fully-working browser at the end of the compile.  There are
reasons why the debian packages include patches.

One other thing I think is missing from this discussion: you are
prohibited from using the firefox trademark, but I don't see why
one would be prohibited from using firefox-bin and other file names
required for compatibility.

> I believe RMS concurs on that: "Images and sounds need to be free if they are 
> essential parts of the software.  But if they are just decoration, and easily 
> replaced, then they do not have to be free.

RMS distinguishes bitstreams to determine which freedoms should apply.
That's very disappointing, but sadly typical of code hackers who don't
see their problems shared by sound hackers and image hackers
(actually, the current situation for sound is far worse than code in
many ways).  I may write more in reply to address@hidden's long essays when
I have more time, unless it's forbidden here.

MJ Ray - see/vidu
Somerset, England. Work/Laborejo:
IRC/Jabber/SIP: on request/peteble

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]