> In as much as you help the other side by adopting an unfair > name, it > is indeed in part your fault. You've become an > accomplice of this > unfairness. Okay, they are the ones who are wrong, but they are not free as you have pointed out. Maybe it is okay to call the projects Linux because they are non-free. For those that want to run truly free systems TRUE(GNU/Linux) may vistit http://www.fsfla.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-libre and download a free* kernel from http://www.fsfla.org/~lxoliva/fsfla/linux-libre/ This way the OS that they will be running will be the true GNU/Linux that you and other FSF promoters are asking. Ours is not a true GNU/Linux, because it contains BAD stuff that makes it nonfree, is that a valid conclusion? > > Linux Distributions include that and they call > themselves Linux > > Distributions not GNU/Linux Distributions with the > excepion of > > Debian GNU/Linux. > > That a lot of people insist in a mistake doesn't make > it right. Now I have an argument that makes it right. They are non-free they include stuff that is no-no from FSF. See top comment :) > > Debian is far from the only one who uses a fair name for > the distros, > or to describe it. Heck, there's even a commercial > distro in Brazil > called Insigne GNU/Linux, by Insigne Free Software do > Brasil. Cool, I did not know that :). I have only heard of Conectiva, which was bought out by Mandrake Soft and became Mandriva. I have heard of Kurumin and also of GoblinX, which is a sister distro of Slax, one of my favorites along with Fedora. There are others that have XP like qualities and also some based on Gentoo like Litrix as well :) > > > Yet your buddies still leech off Fedora and get their > guidelines off > > the Fedora site > > *blinks* What?!? How did you get the impression that any > such thing > happened? That Rahul, Spot and others worked along with > the FSF to > come up with those guidelines and to review licenses used > in Fedora > packages is nothing at all like the FSF just taking > Fedora's > guidelines. Heck, Fedora even conflicts with those > guidelines in > important ways, both in policy and package set. Why would > anyone say > Fedora is a Free distribution when it isn't? We were fooled :( Damn I was very convinced that Fedora followed all the rules, could you at least acknowledge that Fedora is 95% free or something along those lines. IT is not all that BAD is it? > > -- Regards, Antonio -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
