Free software on Windows (was: Re: about

David Mentre David.Mentre at
Wed Oct 31 14:59:34 UTC 2001

Alessandro Rubini <rubini at> writes:

> He is right. If users need bash, awk, perl etc to work, the won't
> press their employers to switch to a libre OS now that they have that
> stuff on windows. 
> (for example, most installations don't even have a compiler so people
> can't practically do anything with their tools but running them).

So it could be mandatory to have a compiler pre-installed on the
machine (and the compiler would be installed if not present). 

> Employers will still be reporting to the press they only work with
> some-company proprietary tools and the advantage of individual users
> won't have any effect at all.

Unfortunalty probably true. :(

> I explained the disadvantage because otherwise RMS' idea would look
> silly.

Yes. Thank you for doing that.

> > Should we put a prominent warning saying "this software is
> > free software with the following 4 rights bla bla"[1]?
> This is already there in all GNU tools; well sort of, it's more
> focused on the no-warranty than on the all-freedom.  It's quite boring
> a message, though.

I was more thinking of a concise startup dialog which is not part of the
legal stuff. Or maybe some text rolling at the bottom of the window. Or
a text appearing if the user is doing nothing.

Notice that I don't won't to defend the idea of putting free software on
Windows. It is just to have some arguments about the pros and cons.

Thank you for your post Alessandro,
Best regards,
 David.Mentre at
 Opinions expressed here are only mine.

More information about the Discussion mailing list