Read above please. You cannot import GPL code into BSD licensed code without restricting the code distribution. In the other direction, you can do it and just add a notice about the license. It does not add restrictions to the distribution. Otherwise Linux distributions wouldn’t even have OpenSSH in base install images.
Of other software, yes. For example Linux distributions can use the BSD or MIT licensed code without any problems.
But it does not allow to remove the license from the software.
On the other hand GPL code cannot be imported into BSD code without introducing restrictions.
If you think about how many people use proprietary Android by Google, it is exactly comparable.
Comparing numbers is pointless here. Fact is that GPL has more conditions when you’re allowed to use and modify the code. More conditions means more restrictions. And this means, less freedom.
At the moment large companies sponsor the development, without being forced to do so. And they allow developers to spend time on the project for free.
The foundation also makes sure that devs sign an agreement otherwise the code is not accepted.
So where is this all proprietary?
So it’s an argument against restrictive licenses? The more freedom the better? I mean Unix in this case had a too restrictive license?
Hi. Nobody here. Do you know that if you own a PS5 or Nintendo Switch, you’re a FreeBSD user?
Maybe we’ve got a different idea what it means to be a user.
They don’t block torrents because they like to watch people connect to the nodes and then sue them.
It’s always better to use onion routing.
Stable is for servers, unstable for desktop. It has worked for 20 years. I actually installed two further Debian workstations recently after trying and failing with Kubuntu. So … no, I don’t have this problem.
No idea why busybox is needed. Is this is your emergency boot environment like initramfs? Sometimes it’s nice that Linux boots up and offers an environment to fix stuff while some modules are broken.
It’s so easy to work around an audit. Companies lie. Auditors are being bribed. Everything is based on trust.
(Oops… wrong thread, I’ll leave it here)
I’ve been using FreeBSD for 20 years on my desktop. I’ve been also mainly using it because I was literally afraid of using Linux filesystems for data storage, when I learned how ZFS works.
Now with bcachefs the situation is different. It’s nice to see an advanced filesystem on Linux, even it’s still beta. I migrated my desktop to Linux, but will keep FreeBSD on my servers for a while, because it’s less hassle for me.
Actually I stopped liking the FreeBSD community. They made a lot of drama in the past years and I stopped being active there. I haven’t reported bugs anymore and fixed them privately or reported directly to upstream. I have many nice things running on servers, but I’m thinking about moving to Debian entirely.
I still don’t really know what you mean. How a document looks like depends on you. I’ve got very many fonts available, much more than average Microsoft Office user has. And it’s easier to use LibreOffice from my point of view, because it emphasizes structure. It looks much cleaner by default than MS Word. The only thing MS Word is better in is typesetting. LibreOffice simply fails to place letters properly.
Documents produced by office suites are not really good for publications. They are very annoying to handle, no matter if it’s MS Office or Libre. The cheapest option to have something professional is LaTeX.
I don’t understand why ODT is complicated. It’s a zipfile with inspectible data. The standard document is also not as vendor-specific as MS OOXML which is thousands of pages that everybody gave up upon.
It’s because it’s not the native format. How does MS Office show/edit ODT documents? Does it work better?
You forgot: use as many dependencies as you need. For example, my init system does not use xz-utils.
touch 'C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32'