Re: : Re: : No systemd discussion?

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 02:25:13PM -0400, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> The link you gave is to a copy of what he wrote.  That copy was on an
> edgy "forum".
> 
> Here's the original:
> <http://www.landley.net/notes.html#23-04-2014>
> 
>     I firmly believe that the Linux community needs to derive a new
>     workstation OS from Google's Android code the way BSD derived a new
>     system from AT&T's Unix code. Clone the proprietary bits, install on
>     the same hardware, provide our version as a series of upgrades to the
>     preinstalled version where possible until we can get vendors to
>     preinstall our version, and meanwhile be closely compatible with the
>     existing preinstalled version that has the giant userbase.
> 
> So: he takes it as a given that GPL isn't acceptable.  Purely because
> of Google's license.  I do the reverse: Google's code is unacceptable,
> at least partly because of Google's license.
> 
> I admit that I don't know what the license clash is.  Likely an
> end-user can install GPLed code, but distribution is forbidden in some
> manner.

I understood it as using gpl code in userspace means you can't call it
an android device.

> You might read some more from Rob's site.  See, for example,
> <http://www.landley.net/toybox/oldlicense.html>
> (He's certainly right about some things.)
> 
> According to Google, they won't accept GPL or LGPL code into AOSP
> (except for the Linux kernel).  I don't yet see how that prevents me
> creating an Android derivative that uses LGPL or GPL code.  The chance
> of Google accepting outside code is minor anyway.
> <https://source.android.com/source/licenses.html>
> <https://source.android.com/source/faqs.html>

Well they can prevent you from using their app store and calling it an
official android device.

> I guess that there might be different restrictions on programs Google
> Play App Store.

Certainly.

> I think that you've been intentionally misdirected.  Google's Android
> won't adopt GPLed or LGPLed code except (one presumes reluctantly) for
> the Kernel.  I doubt that they enforce this on downstream (eg. the
> mythical Linux Desktop derived from Android Open Source Project).

Well I have never been impressed by how android works.  I consider it
not open source, and it certainly does not seem to consider community
input what so ever.  The linux kernel seems to have been a convinient
base layer in about the same way gnu userspace was a convinient thing
for Linus when he wrote the kernel in the begining.

> And yet:
> <http://lwn.net/Articles/478977/>

Maybe it is OK when google does it, but not if anyone else does.

> No idea.  If it were done right (to my standards), systemd should fit.
> But my standards aren't commonly met.
> 
> He really doesn't like systemd, and who can blame him.
> 
> I generally accept many of his arguments but don't agree with his
> weighting of them.

Well people have different goals. :)

> For more technical arguments against systemd (which I am not in a
> technical position to confidently weight), see some entries in
> <http://ewontfix.com/>

-- 
Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists