Slashdot Mirror
FSF-Approved gNewSense 2.0 Released
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."
From http://www.gnewsense.org/Main/Features
emacs, bsdgames, nethack and build-essential part of the default install And now we know...With enough Free (as in Freedom) distributions out there like Debian, it makes one wonder what the motivation would be to create YAFD based on Ubuntu (stripped of its non-free stuff, I presume) which is in turn based on Debian which is as Free as you wanna be.
Unless these folks are making money off of selling the CDs, I just can't understand the motivation to do this when not only do alternatives exist but those alternatives are the basis for the new distro.
Why can't these people with so much time on their hands work on Hurd and get that out into the OS market?
Will a GNU/Hurd version be released soon?
Well, that's different. The F/OSS crowd sure spends a lot of time and energy arguing about who's freer than who. When do we stop monkeying about with distros and kernel versions and get some actual work done?
I thought Gobuntu was the Free Ubuntu project. Not saying that more than one is a bad thing, just that there seems to be a little crossover here.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
But what's the point?
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?
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...
I'm wondering if they named it gNewSense because it's a gNuisance to not have non-free software?
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
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. With gNewSense there are no such non-free repos, and further the gNewSense guys have been going through a lengthy process called KFV (Kernel Freedom Verification), where they did inspect the kernel and removed any sourceless blobs and tracked down files with ambigious or vague license statements, which were either deleted or licensing issues resolved by contacting the copyright holders.
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.
By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
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 music in the OpenBSD 4.3 theme song, ``Home to Hypocrisy''.
I don't personally use non-free software but neither would I consider preventing others from doing so.
Afaik FSF does not recommend the Debian OS since the Debian Project distributes non-free software from their FTP servers and projects that distribute non-free software are seen as a bad thing in general regarless of whether that software is part of their distro or not.
Btw, is gNewSense supposed to sound like geeNuisance when its spoken?
:P
I think if it does they really shot themselves in the foot there...
http://michaelsmith.id.au
ROFL LMAO I'm the asshole below you!
But offtopic is the funniest negative mod because it suggests the content is true.
Anyway:
FAGGOTS, NIGGERS and PEDOPHILES
It starts emacs and removes you from the admin group?
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.
[
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.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Is the new linux distro's mascot the turd in the tricorn hat? If so, it's bound to succeed.
I can't imagine it would remove my ability to su root.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Seriously, yeah at one point it made sense to call it GNU/Linux or "GNU on top of Linux" or whatever, but at this point it's just friggin vanity. Get over it, people. It's Linux to 98% of the world, and the other 2% are self-absorbed twits who want everyone to know how clever they are for coming up with a "recursive" algorithm. I propose that we change the definition of GNU to mean "GNU's Nearly Useless" which is just as recursive and infinitely more descriptive.
Or better yet, just call it "Linux."
That way my Mom won't have to ask me "are you running regular Linux on your computer in the basement or that Agnew Linux?" every time she hears a Linux story on public radio.
/They're not "wipes" they're kleenexes.
//We don't make photocopies, we zerox stuff.
///Unless we're British and applying a plaster, we get out a bandaid not an "adhesive bandage" when we cut ourselves.
sounds like a steaming pile of fundamentalist bullshit, tbh
I vote we rename it gNonsense.
I was quoted out of context in my autobiography...
I thought Debian was also a free operating system!
The name originated as Gnusiance as a reference to RMS's GPG key, but was later changed to gNewSense by Asshole1 and Dipshit2 to also capture the New Sense of the distribution and as a pun on GNU. Some people need to find something more productive to do, than rehash other people's projects. I'm proposing a fork - gArrogantPrick - it's a the same project with lots of non-free binary blobs.
I don't necessarily agree with that point-of-view however I don't think it's inherently WRONG to use non-free things. I'd prefer to use free stuff but I don't have the moral objection like RMS does. I think it's sufficient that distros give a warning that the packages are not free (like Ubuntu's restricted).
I really think RMS is splitting hairs
Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
It seems like it would be easier to start with Debian rather than Ubuntu. Plus then you are closer to the distro that is actually doing all the work,
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 like any license it mixes freedom with rules that restrict other freedoms. But being that it is an attempt to compramise freedoms there will be people (smart, intelegent, well informed and who are better spellers then me) who disagree with the GNU and doesn't like the restrictions that it has because they feel it crosses the freedoms _they_want_to_Enjoy_.
Doing stupid things like renaming Firefox to IceWeezel to because of silly trademark issues, is just dumb We know the brand name of firefox. When we see IceWeezel we think twice about useing it because we wanted firefox, or worse when looking for the web browser and seeing IceWeezel vs. Firefox. What about the freedom of to know what application I am running.
When you go on the path of idology it strays further and further from making systems that actually help people and closer to making systems that force people to think like you.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I don't like Gnome too much. Let's wait for the KNewSense and XNewSense to be released.
Why should they pay for something that comes naturally to them?
I would like to start a new trend. I propose that instead of using the phrase "smoking cigarettes," we use the phrase, "sucking fags."
To make a stupid analogy, imagine you're a monk comtemplating to live either in a monestary or the Red Light district. It's entirely possible to live a monk's life in the Red Light district even though temptation is just a few steps away, but only the monestary comes recommended by the Order. RMS recommends the monestary (gNewSense) over well... pretty much everything else, that's all that's to it.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
you have to marvel at the man. he has really achieved his goal of enabling people to use their computers in freedom. of course there is an overlap between gobuntu and gnewsense (and debian as well) but who cares? they are all free software projects that means that work done on one project flows into the others.
well done mr stallman and all free software developers for sticking by your vision and making the world a better place.
SO GNuisance got released
I personally find Linus' pragmatism argument more compeling than all of Stallman's moral arguements. So what's the real meaning of "free" I promiced you? The devolpers are free to criple and rename a distro as their morals dictate and as a pragmatist I am free to ignor it and carry on with a distro that actually fulfils my needs.
Don't mess with the bunny, outsideworld.org
If a piece of software is free, it will always be free. If it's under BSD, new versions might not be free, but that doesn't affect the copy you have.
Installing proprietary software, even freeware or device blobs means you've given up the four freedoms, which in his world view you should never do.So what is it that I can no longer do? There are things that I can't do with that software, but then I never could do those things with that software in the first place.
Seriously, does anyone else hear the shrill voice of religion in this? What value is there in having an OS that pushes back against the user when they want to use non-free software? I can see the value in distributing an OS that has no non-free components (e.g. if you want to base your software on it, and want to be sure that the licensing is compatible with yours). I can see the value in keeping non-free software out of the core repositories (e.g. to allow different geographic locations for non-free software and free software in order to comply with different laws). What I can't see is any value at all in saying, "we're going to make it as hard as we can for you to do what you want to do."
it said on wikipedia that Richard Stallman uses it [wikipedia.org], that's reason enough for me to at least give it a go
I find it interesting that they chose to base this off of Ubuntu rather than Debian, the latter being known for being quite strict about license, while the former tends to be more liberal about allowing proprietary or 3rd-party software to coexist more easily.
Does it say something about Debian that they are more willing to strip down Ubuntu?
Most likely from a flamewar over RMS saying that, which got covered on a number of nerd-news sites.
I use Gentoo, so it is pretty easy to build an all-free system (and that is what I do). If you use Paludis, you can even filter packages by license to make sure to you do not have an oops.
# Fedora believes in the statement "once free, always free". Why not consolidate efforts with Fedora which has the same goals?
Is there really enough of an audience to justify a rebundled Ubuntu without the non-free bits? Or will this project slowly die as it fails to attract a community?
Does it take its adherence to free software to the point of leaving us in a ghetto where we cannot do the things we could with other distros? Are there drivers for Atheros wifi cards, flash, of ATI displays?
And its also secure. This is just another GNU masterbation project.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Keep in mind that the GNU documentation with invariant parts ( like the gcc docs, glibc docs, et al.) is not considered free under the Debian criteria.
Sadly this is the same reason we don't have a cpan-ish repository of Emacs extensions. It would be convenient to, within Emacs, be able to say something like
And it would fetch those extensions and update/install them for you. However, RMS has stated that in doing that there would be potential for someone to make a non-free repository which would allow people to install non-free extensions too easily, so this sort of thing is discouraged. Someone could still set this up, but it would never be a part of the official Emacs code.
I don't understand why anyone gives a shit about someone as insignificant as Rev. Wright. Maybe you're just not cynical enough about politics?
Obama is a career politician. If Wright is the least savory person he has connections to (doubtful), he's a fucking golden boy compared to his peers on the hill.
I'll probably never use this distro, because I find Gnome quite unfriendly. (I acknowledge that others have other opinions.)
It is, however, important that such distros exist. By their mere existence they prevent ALL distros from being shut down by some single legal twist. From my point of view, Open Solaris serves a similar function. We can't be driven back to MSWind, because there are alternative places that we could run to if our favored systems were prohibited.
(The Hurd should have served this same function, but it still hasn't made it out the door. Perhaps someday.)
Note that for this to be viable, the alternatives need, themselves, to be viable, but that what's viable depends on purposes, goals, and alternatives.
The legal system is such that no real protection from its abuse is possible, but multiple targets, each one difficult, but in different ways, make survival more plausible.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Cite? I suspect there's more to it than that.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
OpenBSD isn't 100% free by GNU standards. Ports notwithstanding, TdR has stated in the past that he does accept binary-only but redistributable device firmwares.
Jesus is coming -- look busy!
Wow ... I never knew that. I use microemacs just because it's snappier, but having a convenient set of download would be reason enough for me to switch back. Heck, there could even be an extension that cut off some of the fat.
Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
http://cisx1.uma.maine.edu/~wbackman/bsdtalk/bsdtalk132.ogg (@ 22 min 10 sec)
Some of us stick to our ideals more closely then others. I'd rather use a crippled card then a proprietary driver, And this is for practical reasons. Free software is always dependable, meanwhile, the proprietary shit always keeps crashing on me and I have no one to go to for help.
More then once I have asked for help with free software and seen a bug patched in under 24 hours (other times I have fixed bugs myself and contributed my knowledge). It may seem like crap to most, but it makes me happy.
This is just a comment on the name of the distro, but I think it's terrible.
First of all, what's up with "new sense"? it sounds like a buzzword. It doesn't convey it's supposed meaning at all. It's just noise.
Second, the shape of the word is all wrong. It looks like some boring and unintelligible java or c variable.
Third, it's hard/unnatural to pronounce.
Frankly, that name sounds like something some programmer who hasn't come out of his basement for weeks would come up with.
Merits of the distro notwithstanding, which I think is a great idea and a worthy cause.
Does it take its adherence to free software to the point of leaving us in a ghetto where we cannot do the things we could with other distros?
Yep, I suspect it does. The FSF list skips even Debian, a group so committed to FOSS that they release Firefox as Iceweasel due to their concerns regarding non-free images. You've got to wonder how restricted your Linux actually has to be to make the FSF recommended list.
The modified BSD license allows you to place additional restrictions on a program that someone else created and then distribute copies with those additional restrictions, i.e. no source code.
You can't do that with a program licensed under the GPL. You must give everyone that receives a copy of the program from you the same freedoms that you had with the program. If you make changes, you must convey the modified source upon request by anyone who receives a binary copy.
College-Pages.com - Online Colleges, Degrees, and Programs