@georgia

Politically true, but historically inaccurate.

existed before .

is a free system without influence.

What GNU provided to free software is more than code.

It's an insight.
Something that could become a proper ideology, a synthesis between and , the two aims that clashed all over the '900 and are still fighting today.

Unfortunately, such synthesis is still mostly unexpressed, far from reaching adulthood and its full potential.
(and there are powerful forces to blend it to just another servant of / )

@yolo @r @leyonhjelm @freemo

@Shamar @georgia @yolo @leyonhjelm @freemo BSD was proprietary until around 1993, same with Plan9, they only released it under a free software license in 2002 (according to wikipedia)
Follow

@r

As for BSD we are apparently reading different pages. Here's my source en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_lice

"Some releases of BSD prior to the adoption of the 4-clause BSD license used a license that is clearly ancestral to the 4-clause BSD license. These releases include 4.3BSD-Tahoe (1988) and Net/1 (1989)."

Plan 9 had a more complex (and somewhat sad) history, because LPL 1 was "almost free but not quite". Yet the point was that operating systems exists that were developed independently of GNU tools.

As of today Plan 9 (and in particular ) is probably the only general purpose operating system out there who can really claim to be GNU-free (and it somewhat does it).

Even today comes with several tools.

So in a way I think it's fair on GNU side to resist to this new wave of embrace, extend and extinguish.

@yolo @georgia @leyonhjelm @freemo

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.