fsck

Damn and does it work as an init too? xD.

(Optional)

It’s a way of explicitly remarking the free part. Before OSI’s definition Open Source referred to permissive licences. In most cases it still refers to permissive licences, thus the clear distinction is relevant.

Unless people starts to refer to BSD, Apache and similar as open source permissive in order to differenciate with open source copyleft (or similar).

Otherwise I feel is completely relevant to refer to copyleft software as Free Software. It helps both to show that there’s differences between both and also makes new people realize that there are different alternatives.

Putting GPL (copyleft) licences in the same bag as BSD-like (Open source and similar, permissive) licences is prejudicial for the FOSS environment.

While Open Source licencea are better than privative ones, they still do not defend the software freedom. Thus making them equivalent to GPL-like licences is misleading.

Users that do not have much knowledge about software freedom may think that Open Source projects are as free as GPL-like ones. This could mean that users end trusting this software as much as GPL-like one.

Open Source does not respect software freedom which in turn means that it also does not defend user freedom.

Putting Free software and Open Source as the same concept is dangerous. Companies prefer Open Source licences because they are able to not respect the software freedom.

If Free Software and Open Source is treated as equal, then those companies can disguise themselves as something they aren’t.

In internet different people reads what you post. Talking with property is important in order to not fool possible new users.

You could for example know the difference between both licences but someone reading you could not.

Swapping concepts of projects that explicitly are Free Software and advertising them as Open Source is a quite disrespectful statement against the creators of those projects.

It’s like confusing left from right. It completely negates the intentions they had when opting for a Free Software licence.

If you are not able to distinguish them at least refer them as FOSS as some kind of respectful attempt.

You realize that Linux is not Open Source. The open source parts of Android are mostly of the google ones (AOSP).

FreeBSD is an Open Source OS.

macOS uses the lack of defense that BSD provides (for Darwin). That’s what Open Source licences are.

There are more examples of Open Source project:

MINIX 3 -> Derives into one of the worst pieces of malware ever. The Intel Management Engine.

There is no such Open Source licence infringement. Open Source licences like BSD clause 3 are permissive in every aspect (well maybe not in TM part). They are so open that they allow restricting the freedom of the software.

Linus Torvalds already stated (LinuxCon 2016):

Over the years I’ve become convinced that the BSD license is great for code you don’t care about. I’ll use it myself. If there’s a library routine that I just want to say ‘hey, this is useful to anybody and I’m not going to maintain this,’ I’ll put it under the BSD license.

Referring to Free (libre) Software as Open Source is a disqualification of those projects and their philosophy.

Open source? Hmmm MacOs? Android?

reboot is linked (aliased) to your init program. In the case you are using systemd then it’s equivalent to systemctl reboot.

reboot is generic and calls whatever init program you use.

There are more than one init. Like for example GNU Shepherd.

No Guix System gang?

Unix_surrealism is joining with the systemd story!!! No fucking way!

Guix is amazing.

Probably on Nintendo switch because of the hardware they use. But no idea at all. It was just an example.

Companies want to enforce their licences strictly but when free software community asks them they are like: “ups mistake, sorry, forgive us”.

Free software licences should be respected with the same degree as they so with privative ones.

I love one of the clauses of gplv3 where if a user does not follow the gpl you may deny them their ability to use it forever.

Would be funny to strike Nintendo with that. Or any other company that likes suing people work.

I’m European, but I don’t get your excitement. Everybody has summer vacations, no? Not just Europeans. So what’s the deal?

What about Shepherd

Debian testing is complelty okay. If you want to have the most up to date security use apt to grab sid security updates. https://wiki.debian.org/DebianTesting

Why are yall so mad about GNU and Free Software movement that it has started? Do you prefer to go to the old times? Apple microsoft fanboys?

Doing an entire OS and library to not use GNU it’s like Apple doing the LLVM to not having to use the GCC. Instead you could be helping in the free software movement and development, but you prefer to go into a GNU vs. Linux fight.

The war should be all the free software movement vs the companies fake open source shit.

This is the way. Most of the games today run as shit because people doesn’t know or care about computer resources management.