[sf-lug] "Educating Tux: case studies of Linux deployments in high schools around the world"
einfeldt at gmail.com
Tue Mar 11 15:39:33 PDT 2008
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> Quoting Christian Einfeldt (einfeldt at gmail.com):
> > So if your boxes are not 100%, what percent of "purity" have you
> I can't help noticing you've changed the subject. _You're_ the one using
> the phrase "FOSS box", not me. And you're using that for machines on
> which you're pointedly and avoidably using proprietary software.
Which non-Free packages am I using? AFAIK, 99% of the packages are free.
De minimis non curat lex. Rome was not built in a day. If I am using 99%
Free Software, and you are using 99.5% Free Software, does that make a huge
> To answer the question, however, *I* do not use the phrase at all.
> > Please do recall that Richard Stallman has said repeatedly that he has
> > Unix to create the tools to move away from non-Free software.
> Using proprietary compilers to create free software that then can replace
> proprietary compilers is, however, nothing at all what you've been
No, I am helping people make the transition to gNewSense, one step at a
> (I'm glad to, where appropriate,
> remind them that it centrally incorporates the GNU Project.)
That is the crux of the issue. How to get them to care about the freedom of
Free Software. My method is to give them boxes which are mostly Free
Software, in the hopes that we can move them toward gNewSense.
> > I mainly prefer FOSS or Free Open Source Software because it is close
> > enough.
> But that is _not_, in fact, an accurate term, by a considerable stretch.
How many people do you know using gNewSense? I don't know anyone who uses
it, other than Richard Stallman, who runs it on his notebook. Is there
anyone on this list who uses it?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the sf-lug