Fwd: Most 'Free' Linux distro

[Garreau, Alexandre]

Le 29/07/2014 à 02h30, Allan Irving a écrit :
> What is regarded as the most free linux distro?

See <https://gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html> that lists well known
fully free distributions which are following free system distribution
guidelines:
<https://gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html>. Some
other popular distributions aren’t included for the following reasons:
<https://gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html>.

For exemple, a Debian *OS* is *by default* fully free, but Debian
*project* (or at least people too close to it) often encourage you to
install proprietary software, notably through nonfree repository, where
the *distribution* (or at least people too close to it) distribute
proprietary software.

> Would it be Linux from scratch with only free software added to it or
> otherwise?

Since Linux from scratch has as purpose of making you compile fully a
Linux-based Unix system (GNU/Linux with more or less GNU, depending of
how you build it) with teaching purposes, it’s quite easy to build it
fully free.

For the basis system you just have to download, compile and install GNU
Linux-libre instead of the classical Linux kernel shipped by kernel.org.

For the rest (BLFS) you have to be aware of the license of the package
you’re installing, but that isn’t so difficult.

Since LFS/BLFS is not a distribution but a *book* it can’t be qualified
of “free” or not, since *you* determine what will be the final
system. ;)

> Is there an already existing distro that is in line with
> the FSF ideals?

Yes, several (even if only a few), as I said:
<https://gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html>.

> I use Debian for servers at the moment and I am looking into Debian or Arch
> as a desktop distro.

Debian is fine because it is more upstream, known and stable. Therefore
it is fine *until you don’t use nonfree repository* which ships
proprietary software for “users who should absolutely use it”, to “make
them still use Debian instead of something even less free”. Their wiki
even recommend several times to install nonfree software without even
warning the user about its implications.

This approach is wrong and doesn’t even try —as do Trisquel or Parabola—
to fully base itself on education rather than consciousness (“you have
to buy a free-friendly wifi card to have wifi to stay free, see, it’s
not *so* expensive, it’s quite quick and easy” instead of “Oh yeah you
can just install the proprietary driver doing this”).

So Debian is fine is you’re a warned user who can know the implications
of using proprietary software and will know to not use them even with
the wiki (and people on IRC) promoting nonfree repo.

Otherwise, if for example you’re advising to switch to GNU/Linux some
non-completely-warned friend, and you fear them to be invited to use
proprietary software, you have gNewSense, a Debian-based FSF-financed
distribution: <http://www.gnewsense.org/>.

And if you think something more “ubuntuish” would be more adapted to
them but you don’t recommand Ubuntu and derivatives because of the
obvious issues they have, you still have Trisquel, an Ubuntu-based fully
free distribution (very fine): <http://trisquel.info/>

For Arch it’s quite simple, because some simple things allows to
blacklist all proprietary software, with Parabola:
<http://parabolagnulinux.org/>.

Hoping to help :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 948 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140729/8140b66b/attachment.sig>