3 ms·

The summary from this seems to be that RMS is against having a non-free tool consume the output of a free tool? Is that an accurate summary? If so this seems l

• anon1385 12y ago
  You have to understand the perspective of the FSF. They view non-free software as fundamentally morally evil. In the same way that most people today view slavery as fundamentally wrong. The comparison to slavery is one RMS and the FSF often make themselves. To extend the analogy: if picking cotton was only economically viable if done with slave labour, then most people would agree we are better off not picking cotton at all. Similarly the FSF position is that if solving a problem using computers is only possible in a way that uses or enables non-free software, then we are better off not using computers to solve that problem at all.
  • hga 12y ago
    In his inimitable style, Theo de Raadt, extremely annoyed by a 2007 effort to GPL a driver that OpenBSD reverse engineered with much sweat, notes that RMS has been perfectly fine with GCC having code to run on, and built binaries for, closed platforms.... This GCC stuff is very much a shades of grey situation in practice.