Should the Linux Desktop Be "Pure?"

jammag writes "According to Matt Hartley, many Linux desktop users don't like to admit that there's scads of closed source code commonly used with the Linux desktop. Hartley points to examples like proprietary drivers, the popularity of Skype among Linux users (in preference to the open source Ekiga), and the use of Wine. He concludes that, hey, if the code works, use it — a stance that won't sit well with purists. But his article raises the question: is it better to embrace some closed source fixes, and so create a larger user base, or to remain pure, and keep Linux for the specialists?"

Comments

Re:Yes.

[onecheapgeek]

Which is likely why he didn't say "The GNU project is very nice and very idealistic, but has so far failed." He did say "The GNU project is very nice and very idealistic, but has so far failed to displace close source software."

You need to finish sentences, not stop when you see a partial implication that gets your knickers in a wad.

Re:Stupid question

[byolinux]

Sadly, both of those contain binary blobs and at least Debian also distributes some proprietary software.

There are a few distributions but I accept these are hardly well known.

Some well known distributions allow a choice ...

[Zero__Kelvin]

Mandriva allows you to choose between purist and pragmatist versions. Just check the appropriate radio button when you download.

Gentoo only installs non-free stuff if you tell it to do so, since you have complete control over the entire installation process and everything is built from the source.

I'm sure there are other well known distributions that offer a choice is well.

Re:There is no answer, it depends on what you want

[fuzzix]

Even then, how are going to tell if the compiled version you get is made from the exact same source?

Use Slackware. Pat doesn't mess with the original source. Package build scripts (SlackBuilds) use original source tarballs... If you don't trust the distro's package the SlackBuilds are available for you to build your own package based on source you've independently verified. SlackBuilds are also easily modified to build packages based on the latest source for when you just can't wait for the package maintainer to patch up that new OpenSSH exploit.

Thanks, but please don't trust us that much

[gwolf]

I am a Debian Developer. Depending on the package, I sometimes work quite close with the upstream developer, sometimes quite far. But the main work I do is:

• to ensure it correctly fits in with our policies - All files are in their place, no conflicts, etc.
• Check the bugs reported by our users, try to fix them, and coordinate with the authors about any fixes that "touch" their code
• Keep often track of their code, new versions, fixes, etc.

I am not by far as familiar with the code as the upstream authors, I am familiar only with certain well-known details. So, yes, there is a safety layer in there, but it's not as thick as you seem to assume