Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

quoted text
> As I've said, I think it's acceptable for free applications to run on
> non-free platforms (and say that they do), because this doesn't
> recommend the installation of those non-free platforms.  But free
> systems should not recommend, suggest, or offer to install non-free
> apps.

As has been explained a number of times, to install the software in
question, one has to first manually find, install, and configure the
ports tree and then browse though it to find the specific build
instructions.  One must then make and install the software from data
downloaded from the web.  I don't think this constitutes a process to
"recommend, suggest, or offer to install" as those words are commonly
understood.

Most people don't bother installing the ports tree, as the majority of the
applications software, all of which is unencumbered, is available as
binary packages.  These are easily installed directly using pkg_add. (*)

In any case, modifying the ports tree to eliminate the offending items
would be less than an hour's work.  Thus, OpenBSD is less than one hour
from perfection, even by your lights.  Does any GNU/Linux system really
meet this level of freedom?


quoted text
> I follow these principles without discriminating between people
> or groups.
>
> Thus, I think it is legitimate for apps to run on Windows, so I apply
> this to both GNU applications and OpenBSD-related applications such as
> OpenSSH.  I recognize that this can have the negative effect of
> reducing the pressure for people to move away from Windows, but I don't
> think that alone is a reason to reject apps that can run on Windows.

GNU/Linux systems are available from Wal-Mart and Dell, and 'Linux' is a
household word understood by children and great-grandmothers.  Also,
there are many older systems which run beautifully with GNU/Linux (and
even better with OpenBSD!) and which should not be recycled just so
their owners can move to Vista, which they don't want or need.

I understand your strategy and I think it's been a good choice, but for
five years ago.  This discussion has raised issues which suggest that
it's well past the time to start removing these incentives.

People are ready.  The world is ready.

Also, it's clearly no longer necessary to support embedded cross
development on proprietary platforms to encourage the use of free tools.
As an FSF Associate Member, I request that you consider phasing it out.

Time to start reeling in the bait!  Do you have the ability to do that?

-- 
KBK



(*) Quoting the FAQ (http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq15.html#Ports):

"IMPORTANT NOTE: The ports tree is meant for advanced users. Everyone is
encouraged to use the pre-compiled binary packages. Do NOT ask beginner
questions on the mailing lists like "How can I get the ports tree
working?". If you have questions about the ports tree, it is assumed
that you have read the manual pages and this FAQ, and that you are able
to work with it."