An anonymous reader writes "gNewSense DeltaH (2.0), a second major release of a GNU/Linux distribution with focus on freedom, has just been released. It is based on Ubuntu 8.04 which was released less than week ago. gNewSense is one of the few GNU/Linux distributions listed as free by the GNU Project."
It's much more than that. You'd be surprised at how careful they are not to ship with a single bit that is not Free Software.
It may seem ludicrous to some at first, but think about the benefit. Even if you wont use it as your main system you can use it to test just how much of your hardware is 100% Free Software compliant, or you can use it to see what hardware you should buy that is 100% compliant.
And Free Software compliant hardware equals best possible experience - since it will all then work out of the box, with bugs fixed and improvements steadily coming, because you don't need to depend on some third party for everything.
I believe that Ubuntu has non-free drivers in the base install. Granted, you need to go into the restricted drivers manager and activate them to get the full benefit, but they are there.
So in short it shows how non-freesoftware makes your life that much easier. By seeing how limited a fully free software implement is. I would much rather see more non-GNU version of free and more diversity of application in a distribution. Open Sourced (Different versions), Closed Source... A distibution that makes my current system run well and help me use to the computer to solve problem and complete my workflow.
FSF is working on the assumption that all people like the GNU and think it offers freedom. But
Do you even *know* the details on the Firefox/Iceweasel decision? What is your suggestion to the issue then?
The path of "ideology" is what allows people to have something that works and bitch about lack of "pragmatism". If not by those silly people following their "ideology" you would not be complaining about how you would "prefer" to see non-GNU vresions (apparently, just "because", no real reason).
Your comments about licencing don't make much sense either, no you cry about "choice". There is plenty
Doing stupid things like renaming Firefox to IceWeezel to because of silly trademark issues, is just dumb
I thought they did this because the Mozilla people said they had to if they wanted to include patches that hadn't been approved thru Mozilla? But then I didn't follow this that closely, so maybe I misunderstood something...
No you followed it just fine, that's exactly why they did it Being able to patch software independent of the original developer is a core component of Free Software and Debian GNU/Linux is a great example of Free Software.
Personally I do enjoy the freedom that FSF and distros like Debian and gNewSense provide. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to use them though.
There will always be Ubuntu, Linspire, Mepis and other distros that provide non-free crutches to those that need them.
And Free Software compliant hardware equals best possible experience - since it will all then work out of the box, with bugs fixed and improvements steadily coming, because you don't need to depend on some third party for everything.
Oh, the Free Software community doesn't count as a third party?
You are right, but there is one point that I don't think you considered: paying someone to fix a bug or add a feature.
If you have 20 PCs in your office and they all have "free" drivers for their video cards, then you can always pay someone to fix any bugs that come up - and it might even be worth the money depending on how many computers you have with the same card.
Good luck trying to pay nvidia to fix their driver.
At first, I honestly thought it was a joke being played by a couple of people, ripping out all the good bits like nVidia drivers, etc. to make it a "nuisance" on people trying to get a working distro... but apparently I was wrong they are dead serious.
This [ubuntu.com] explains it pretty well. In short, gNewSense was first, Gobuntu is official, and they haven't had the time or motivation to merge yet.
and the thrashing the gNewSense name is getting here (deservedly so! ugh.. i thought microsoft had the lock on the nuisance operating system and the patents to back it up) will speedup the aforementioned merge as well as the assumption of the gobuntu name for the combined project.
So with debian, the fact that I have to go to etc, edit apt.sources and add the non-free repositories (something which I would have to consciously and knowingly do), isn't enough for them?
OK, I think the FSF just lost a little bit of respect here.
I suspect it's more because even though they aren't made available by default, Debian actually maintains non-free repositories. And let's face it, adding the debian.org non-free depositories is one of the first things anybody with a Debian system does while setting it up.
Oh, now you gone done it... you're going to get the ire of the RMS disciples. You are either new or trolling. They are using the term "free" as in "freedom to do what you want", not as in "free beer during happy hour".
Ubuntu, AFAIK, contains some proprietary firmware and such to make hardware more likely to work.
Of course, "free" here no longer means you can distribute it however you want to, if it's part of a system then it imposes certain rules on that system nowadays...
RMS came onto the OpenBSD-misc mailing list in January to inform the subscribers that he had deemed OBSD to be non-free. Much wonderment ensued.
It transpired that the ports collection contained some non-free software. If one pkg_adds such software one sees a warning that the package is considered non-free, but this was not sufficient for RMS. It seems that he'd rather a user be inhibited from installing any non-free software that be allowed to express free will.
Wow, did you read the same thread I did? RMS popped in to say in essence that he will not recommend users use OpenBSD (based on the presence of non-free software in their ports collection). Then he got flamed by a bunch of people claiming all sorts of things he didn't say, to which he responded one by one and was quite polite during most of the 30-odd messages I saw.
He said explicitly (multiple times) that he respects the *choice* of end users to use whatever they want to on their own systems. He tried (a
The first thing that came to my mind, and another AC at -1 noted it, is that "gNewSense" must be pronounced "gee, nuisance" or just "nuisance." I can't decide if GIMP or Nuisance wins the prize for most useless name. I'm not saying go through a formal focus group process, but if it's a project worth spending a little time on, isn't it worth a name that doesn't have unsavory connotations? Just ask four friends (vocally) whether a name just sounds vaguely nonsensical or might be misunderstood as something else.
Thanks alot. I personally didn't think of the connection to "nuisance"... but now that you've pointed it out, I won't be able to stop thinking that everytime I hear it.
Just like when someone pointed out to me what "new direction" sounds like if you say it fast enough.
I hate it. Now everytime I'm in a strategic meeting, and someone says "what the project needs is a new direction", I'm momentarily shocked that they are suggesting nude erections. (Perhaps I've now infected you with this terrible meme-virus.)
The Hurd team are the ultimate tinkerers. Whenever it looks like its getting anywhere near complete (as in pre-alpha) they decide to switch the microkernal system, reinvent the shared memory architecture or something.
it's a combination of linux and Free software zealotry
as i understand, they remove binary blob drivers from the kernel, as well as only support free software for the distro.
probably hardcore programmers for a living, its hard to imagine anyone else not wanting(or needing) to have some non-free software for at least a *few* things
or maybe theyre hypocrites, and install binary stuff on the side while hiding their shame.
Debian is not strictly free as in freedom, at least not to the point to be recommended by the fsf. The main reason is, it's still too easy to install non-free stuff through debian repos.
Debian isn't free because it leaves you free to go non-free?
Debian is not strictly free as in freedom, at least not to the point to be recommended by the fsf. The main reason is, it's still too easy to install non-free stuff through debian repos.
No, it's because non-free stuff exists in the main Debian distribution. Notably, the kernel. From the original announcement of gNewSense:
At this time, Debian still does contain some proprietary software, in both the current Sarge distribution and in the upcoming Etch distribution. The Debian developers felt that they had no choice but to do this, because there is no open-source replacement for some proprietary device firmware contained within the Debian kernel packages. Without these binary "blobs," many WiFi and graphic drivers will not work at all, or at a minimal level, on Linux.
Nevertheless, the Debian developer community remains determined to root out proprietary firmware. In its decision to release Etch with proprietary firmware, the Debian Project declared that while "We give priority to the timely release of Etch over sorting every bit out" they would still "treat removal of sourceless firmware as a best-effort process."
The mere existence of the non-free repository wouldn't prevent the FSF from considering Debian a Free operating system.
The mere existence of the non-free repository wouldn't prevent the FSF from considering Debian a Free operating system.
They class OpenBSD as non-free even though the base system is 100% Free Software, because the ports system contains build infrastructure required to create packages from non-Free software (e.g. Opera).
Mark Shuttleworth recently declared [ubuntu.com] that Gobuntu was not going so well as he expected because of the lack of community support and conjectured that perhaps it was better if the development team helped the gNewSense team instead.
It seems they are doing exactly that now, since the 8.04 folder of the gobuntu download page [ubuntu.com] it's empty.
And why do we need another Distro? (Score:5, Funny)
From http://www.gnewsense.org/Main/Features [gnewsense.org]
Re:And why do we need another Distro? (Score:5, Informative)
It's much more than that. You'd be surprised at how careful they are not to ship with a single bit that is not Free Software.
It may seem ludicrous to some at first, but think about the benefit. Even if you wont use it as your main system you can use it to test just how much of your hardware is 100% Free Software compliant, or you can use it to see what hardware you should buy that is 100% compliant.
And Free Software compliant hardware equals best possible experience - since it will all then work out of the box, with bugs fixed and improvements steadily coming, because you don't need to depend on some third party for everything.
gNewSense plays a crucial role.
You can read a bit more about that here http://www.nuxified.org/blog/gnewsense_2_0_a_premier_freedomware_platform_based_on_ubuntu_8_04_lts_released [nuxified.org]
Cheers
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe that Ubuntu has non-free drivers in the base install. Granted, you need to go into the restricted drivers manager and activate them to get the full benefit, but they are there.
In otherwords (Score:2)
I would much rather see more non-GNU version of free and more diversity of application in a distribution. Open Sourced (Different versions), Closed Source... A distibution that makes my current system run well and help me use to the computer to solve problem and complete my workflow.
FSF is working on the assumption that all people like the GNU and think it offers freedom. But
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The path of "ideology" is what allows people to have something that works and bitch about lack of "pragmatism". If not by those silly people following their "ideology" you would not be complaining about how you would "prefer" to see non-GNU vresions (apparently, just "because", no real reason).
Your comments about licencing don't make much sense either, no you cry about "choice". There is plenty
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Doing stupid things like renaming Firefox to IceWeezel to because of silly trademark issues, is just dumb
I thought they did this because the Mozilla people said they had to if they wanted to include patches that hadn't been approved thru Mozilla? But then I didn't follow this that closely, so maybe I misunderstood something...
No you followed it just fine, that's exactly why they did it Being able to patch software independent of the original developer is a core component of Free Software and Debian GNU/Linux is a great example of Free Software.
Personally I do enjoy the freedom that FSF and distros like Debian and gNewSense provide. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to use them though.
There will always be Ubuntu, Linspire, Mepis and other distros that provide non-free crutches to those that need them.
The
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, the Free Software community doesn't count as a third party?
Re:And why do we need another Distro? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you have 20 PCs in your office and they all have "free" drivers for their video cards, then you can always pay someone to fix any bugs that come up - and it might even be worth the money depending on how many computers you have with the same card.
Good luck trying to pay nvidia to fix their driver.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
The OSS crowd still has a bit to learn about branding, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess I need to RTFA (Score:2, Insightful)
Debian is properly free, in the sense the gNewSense is. Ubuntu is based on debian, gobuntu is ubuntu's free version, why does gNewsense need to exist?
Or does it address some other need, and freedom is just a side-effect?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I think the FSF just lost a little bit of respect here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu, AFAIK, contains some proprietary firmware and such to make hardware more likely to work.
Re: (Score:2)
hmm (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now immortalised in song (Score:2, Interesting)
RMS came onto the OpenBSD-misc mailing list in January to inform the subscribers that he had deemed OBSD to be non-free. Much wonderment ensued.
It transpired that the ports collection contained some non-free software. If one pkg_adds such software one sees a warning that the package is considered non-free, but this was not sufficient for RMS. It seems that he'd rather a user be inhibited from installing any non-free software that be allowed to express free will.
His position has now been set to mus
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
RMS popped in to say in essence that he will not recommend users use OpenBSD (based on the presence of non-free software in their ports collection). Then he got flamed by a bunch of people claiming all sorts of things he didn't say, to which he responded one by one and was quite polite during most of the 30-odd messages I saw.
He said explicitly (multiple times) that he respects the *choice* of end users to use whatever they want to on their own systems. He tried (a
naming (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just like when someone pointed out to me what "new direction" sounds like if you say it fast enough.
I hate it. Now everytime I'm in a strategic meeting, and someone says "what the project needs is a new direction", I'm momentarily shocked that they are suggesting nude erections. (Perhaps I've now infected you with this terrible meme-virus.)
Re: (Score:2)
Why based on Ubuntu instead of Debian (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://humorix.org/articles/2006/06/hurd/ [humorix.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The Hurd team are the ultimate tinkerers. Whenever it looks like its getting anywhere near complete (as in pre-alpha) they decide to switch the microkernal system, reinvent the shared memory architecture or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Unless you pay for the media, you're not suppor (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Debian is not strictly free as in freedom, at least not to the point to be recommended by the fsf. The main reason is, it's still too easy to install non-free stuff through debian repos.
No, it's because non-free stuff exists in the main Debian distribution. Notably, the kernel. From the original announcement of gNewSense:
At this time, Debian still does contain some proprietary software, in both the current Sarge distribution and in the upcoming Etch distribution. The Debian developers felt that they had no choice but to do this, because there is no open-source replacement for some proprietary device firmware contained within the Debian kernel packages. Without these binary "blobs," many WiFi and graphic drivers will not work at all, or at a minimal level, on Linux.
Nevertheless, the Debian developer community remains determined to root out proprietary firmware. In its decision to release Etch with proprietary firmware, the Debian Project declared that while "We give priority to the timely release of Etch over sorting every bit out" they would still "treat removal of sourceless firmware as a best-effort process."
The mere existence of the non-free repository wouldn't prevent the FSF from considering Debian a Free operating system.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not surprisingly, it's hard to please a zealot.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)