Some events in the history of Free and Open Source Software were turning points, decisive to its evolution, and some of these events were materialized through documents. Here is a chronological series of important documents of FOSS history.
- September 27th, 1983: Richard Stallman announces the plan for the GNU operating system on several Arpanet mailing lists and a newsgroup on Usenetsource:
[+ show][- hide]
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!mit-eddie!RMS@MIT-OZ
From: RMS@MIT-OZ@mit-eddie.UUCP (Richard Stallman)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.usoft
Subject: new UNIX implementation
Message-ID: <771@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 27-Sep-83 13:35:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.771
Posted: Tue Sep 27 13:35:59 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 29-Sep-83 07:38:11 EDT
Organization: MIT AI Lab, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 90Free Unix!
Starting this Thanksgiving I am going to write a complete
Unix-compatible software system called GNU (for Gnu's Not Unix), and
give it away free to everyone who can use it. Contributions of time,
money, programs and equipment are greatly needed.To begin with, GNU will be a kernel plus all the utilities needed to
write and run C programs: editor, shell, C compiler, linker,
assembler, and a few other things. After this we will add a text
formatter, a YACC, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of
other things. We hope to supply, eventually, everything useful that
normally comes with a Unix system, and anything else useful, including
on-line and hardcopy documentation.GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical
to Unix. We will make all improvements that are convenient, based
on our experience with other operating systems. In particular,
we plan to have longer filenames, file version numbers, a crashproof
file system, filename completion perhaps, terminal-independent
display support, and eventually a Lisp-based window system through
which several Lisp programs and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen.
Both C and Lisp will be available as system programming languages.
We will have network software based on MIT's chaosnet protocol,
far superior to UUCP. We may also have something compatible
with UUCP.Who Am I?
I am Richard Stallman, inventor of the original much-imitated EMACS
editor, now at the Artificial Intelligence Lab at MIT. I have worked
extensively on compilers, editors, debuggers, command interpreters, the
Incompatible Timesharing System and the Lisp Machine operating system.
I pioneered terminal-independent display support in ITS. In addition I
have implemented one crashproof file system and two window systems for
Lisp machines.Why I Must Write GNU
I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I
must share it with other people who like it. I cannot in good
conscience sign a nondisclosure agreement or a software license
agreement.So that I can continue to use computers without violating my principles,
I have decided to put together a sufficient body of free software so that
I will be able to get along without any software that is not free.How You Can Contribute
I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and money.
I'm asking individuals for donations of programs and work.One computer manufacturer has already offered to provide a machine. But
we could use more. One consequence you can expect if you donate
machines is that GNU will run on them at an early date. The machine had
better be able to operate in a residential area, and not require
sophisticated cooling or power.Individual programmers can contribute by writing a compatible duplicate
of some Unix utility and giving it to me. For most projects, such
part-time distributed work would be very hard to coordinate; the
independently-written parts would not work together. But for the
particular task of replacing Unix, this problem is absent. Most
interface specifications are fixed by Unix compatibility. If each
contribution works with the rest of Unix, it will probably work
with the rest of GNU.If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full or
part time. The salary won't be high, but I'm looking for people for
whom knowing they are helping humanity is as important as money. I view
this as a way of enabling dedicated people to devote their full energies to
working on GNU by sparing them the need to make a living in another way.For more information, contact me.
Arpanet mail:
RMS@MIT-MC.ARPAUsenet:
...!mit-eddie!RMS@OZ
...!mit-vax!RMS@OZUS Snail:
Richard Stallman
166 Prospect St
Cambridge, MA 02139
- March, 1985: Richard Stallman writes the “The GNU Manifesto“, published on “Dr. Dobb’s Journal of Software Tools”, page 30, Volume 10, Number 3, March, 1985 – IISN 1044-789X. source
[+ show][- hide]
The Gnu Manifesto
What’s GNU? Gnu’s Not Unix!
GNU, which stands for Gnu’s Not Unix, is the name for the complete Unix-compatible software system which I am writing so that I can give it away free to everyone who can use it.(1) Several other volunteers are helping me. Contributions of time, money, programs and equipment are greatly needed.
So far we have an Emacs text editor with Lisp for writing editor commands, a source level debugger, a yacc-compatible parser generator, a linker, and around 35 utilities. A shell (command interpreter) is nearly completed. A new portable optimizing C compiler has compiled itself and may be released this year. An initial kernel exists but many more features are needed to emulate Unix. When the kernel and compiler are finished, it will be possible to distribute a GNU system suitable for program development. We will use TeX as our text formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We will use the free, portable X window system as well. After this we will add a portable Common Lisp, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of other things, plus on-line documentation. We hope to supply, eventually, everything useful that normally comes with a Unix system, and more.
GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to Unix. We will make all improvements that are convenient, based on our experience with other operating systems. In particular, we plan to have longer file names, file version numbers, a crashproof file system, file name completion perhaps, terminal-independent display support, and perhaps eventually a Lisp-based window system through which several Lisp programs and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen. Both C and Lisp will be available as system programming languages. We will try to support UUCP, MIT Chaosnet, and Internet protocols for communication.
GNU is aimed initially at machines in the 68000/16000 class with virtual memory, because they are the easiest machines to make it run on. The extra effort to make it run on smaller machines will be left to someone who wants to use it on them.
To avoid horrible confusion, please pronounce the ‘G’ in the word ‘GNU’ when it is the name of this project.
Why I Must Write GNU
I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I must share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share with others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in this way. I cannot in good conscience sign a nondisclosure agreement or a software license agreement. For years I worked within the Artificial Intelligence Lab to resist such tendencies and other inhospitalities, but eventually they had gone too far: I could not remain in an institution where such things are done for me against my will.
So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have decided to put together a sufficient body of free software so that I will be able to get along without any software that is not free. I have resigned from the AI lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent me from giving GNU away.(2)
Why GNU Will Be Compatible with Unix
Unix is not my ideal system, but it is not too bad. The essential features of Unix seem to be good ones, and I think I can fill in what Unix lacks without spoiling them. And a system compatible with Unix would be convenient for many other people to adopt.
How GNU Will Be Available
GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to modify and redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to restrict its further redistribution. That is to say, proprietary modifications will not be allowed. I want to make sure that all versions of GNU remain free.
Why Many Other Programmers Want to Help
I have found many other programmers who are excited about GNU and want to help.
Many programmers are unhappy about the commercialization of system software. It may enable them to make more money, but it requires them to feel in conflict with other programmers in general rather than feel as comrades. The fundamental act of friendship among programmers is the sharing of programs; marketing arrangements now typically used essentially forbid programmers to treat others as friends. The purchaser of software must choose between friendship and obeying the law. Naturally, many decide that friendship is more important. But those who believe in law often do not feel at ease with either choice. They become cynical and think that programming is just a way of making money.
By working on and using GNU rather than proprietary programs, we can be hospitable to everyone and obey the law. In addition, GNU serves as an example to inspire and a banner to rally others to join us in sharing. This can give us a feeling of harmony which is impossible if we use software that is not free. For about half the programmers I talk to, this is an important happiness that money cannot replace.
How You Can Contribute
(Nowadays, for software tasks to work on, see the GNU task list. For other ways to contribute, see http://www.gnu.org/help.)
I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and money. I’m asking individuals for donations of programs and work.
One consequence you can expect if you donate machines is that GNU will run on them at an early date. The machines should be complete, ready to use systems, approved for use in a residential area, and not in need of sophisticated cooling or power.
I have found very many programmers eager to contribute part-time work for GNU. For most projects, such part-time distributed work would be very hard to coordinate; the independently-written parts would not work together. But for the particular task of replacing Unix, this problem is absent. A complete Unix system contains hundreds of utility programs, each of which is documented separately. Most interface specifications are fixed by Unix compatibility. If each contributor can write a compatible replacement for a single Unix utility, and make it work properly in place of the original on a Unix system, then these utilities will work right when put together. Even allowing for Murphy to create a few unexpected problems, assembling these components will be a feasible task. (The kernel will require closer communication and will be worked on by a small, tight group.)
If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full or part time. The salary won’t be high by programmers’ standards, but I’m looking for people for whom building community spirit is as important as making money. I view this as a way of enabling dedicated people to devote their full energies to working on GNU by sparing them the need to make a living in another way.
Why All Computer Users Will Benefit
Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system software free, just like air.(3)
This means much more than just saving everyone the price of a Unix license. It means that much wasteful duplication of system programming effort will be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the state of the art.
Complete system sources will be available to everyone. As a result, a user who needs changes in the system will always be free to make them himself, or hire any available programmer or company to make them for him. Users will no longer be at the mercy of one programmer or company which owns the sources and is in sole position to make changes.
Schools will be able to provide a much more educational environment by encouraging all students to study and improve the system code. Harvard’s computer lab used to have the policy that no program could be installed on the system if its sources were not on public display, and upheld it by actually refusing to install certain programs. I was very much inspired by this.
Finally, the overhead of considering who owns the system software and what one is or is not entitled to do with it will be lifted.
Arrangements to make people pay for using a program, including licensing of copies, always incur a tremendous cost to society through the cumbersome mechanisms necessary to figure out how much (that is, which programs) a person must pay for. And only a police state can force everyone to obey them. Consider a space station where air must be manufactured at great cost: charging each breather per liter of air may be fair, but wearing the metered gas mask all day and all night is intolerable even if everyone can afford to pay the air bill. And the TV cameras everywhere to see if you ever take the mask off are outrageous. It’s better to support the air plant with a head tax and chuck the masks.
Copying all or parts of a program is as natural to a programmer as breathing, and as productive. It ought to be as free.
Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU’s Goals
“Nobody will use it if it is free, because that means they can’t rely on any support.”
“You have to charge for the program to pay for providing the support.”
If people would rather pay for GNU plus service than get GNU free without service, a company to provide just service to people who have obtained GNU free ought to be profitable.(4)
We must distinguish between support in the form of real programming work and mere handholding. The former is something one cannot rely on from a software vendor. If your problem is not shared by enough people, the vendor will tell you to get lost.
If your business needs to be able to rely on support, the only way is to have all the necessary sources and tools. Then you can hire any available person to fix your problem; you are not at the mercy of any individual. With Unix, the price of sources puts this out of consideration for most businesses. With GNU this will be easy. It is still possible for there to be no available competent person, but this problem cannot be blamed on distribution arrangements. GNU does not eliminate all the world’s problems, only some of them.
Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need handholding: doing things for them which they could easily do themselves but don’t know how.
Such services could be provided by companies that sell just hand-holding and repair service. If it is true that users would rather spend money and get a product with service, they will also be willing to buy the service having got the product free. The service companies will compete in quality and price; users will not be tied to any particular one. Meanwhile, those of us who don’t need the service should be able to use the program without paying for the service.
“You cannot reach many people without advertising, and you must charge for the program to support that.”
“It’s no use advertising a program people can get free.”
There are various forms of free or very cheap publicity that can be used to inform numbers of computer users about something like GNU. But it may be true that one can reach more microcomputer users with advertising. If this is really so, a business which advertises the service of copying and mailing GNU for a fee ought to be successful enough to pay for its advertising and more. This way, only the users who benefit from the advertising pay for it.
On the other hand, if many people get GNU from their friends, and such companies don’t succeed, this will show that advertising was not really necessary to spread GNU. Why is it that free market advocates don’t want to let the free market decide this?(5)
“My company needs a proprietary operating system to get a competitive edge.”
GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of competition. You will not be able to get an edge in this area, but neither will your competitors be able to get an edge over you. You and they will compete in other areas, while benefiting mutually in this one. If your business is selling an operating system, you will not like GNU, but that’s tough on you. If your business is something else, GNU can save you from being pushed into the expensive business of selling operating systems.
I would like to see GNU development supported by gifts from many manufacturers and users, reducing the cost to each.(6)
“Don’t programmers deserve a reward for their creativity?”
If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution. Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. If programmers deserve to be rewarded for creating innovative programs, by the same token they deserve to be punished if they restrict the use of these programs.
“Shouldn’t a programmer be able to ask for a reward for his creativity?”
There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to maximize one’s income, as long as one does not use means that are destructive. But the means customary in the field of software today are based on destruction.
Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of it is destructive because the restrictions reduce the amount and the ways that the program can be used. This reduces the amount of wealth that humanity derives from the program. When there is a deliberate choice to restrict, the harmful consequences are deliberate destruction.
The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to become wealthier is that, if everyone did so, we would all become poorer from the mutual destructiveness. This is Kantian ethics; or, the Golden Rule. Since I do not like the consequences that result if everyone hoards information, I am required to consider it wrong for one to do so. Specifically, the desire to be rewarded for one’s creativity does not justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that creativity.
“Won’t programmers starve?”
I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us cannot manage to get any money for standing on the street and making faces. But we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives standing on the street making faces, and starving. We do something else.
But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner’s implicit assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers cannot possibly be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing.
The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as now.
Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software. It is the most common basis(7) because it brings in the most money. If it were prohibited, or rejected by the customer, software business would move to other bases of organization which are now used less often. There are always numerous ways to organize any kind of business.
Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it is now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not considered an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they now do. If programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice either. (In practice they would still make considerably more than that.)
“Don’t people have a right to control how their creativity is used?”
“Control over the use of one’s ideas” really constitutes control over other people’s lives; and it is usually used to make their lives more difficult.
People who have studied the issue of intellectual property rights(8) carefully (such as lawyers) say that there is no intrinsic right to intellectual property. The kinds of supposed intellectual property rights that the government recognizes were created by specific acts of legislation for specific purposes.
For example, the patent system was established to encourage inventors to disclose the details of their inventions. Its purpose was to help society rather than to help inventors. At the time, the life span of 17 years for a patent was short compared with the rate of advance of the state of the art. Since patents are an issue only among manufacturers, for whom the cost and effort of a license agreement are small compared with setting up production, the patents often do not do much harm. They do not obstruct most individuals who use patented products.
The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors frequently copied other authors at length in works of non-fiction. This practice was useful, and is the only way many authors’ works have survived even in part. The copyright system was created expressly for the purpose of encouraging authorship. In the domain for which it was invented—books, which could be copied economically only on a printing press—it did little harm, and did not obstruct most of the individuals who read the books.
All intellectual property rights are just licenses granted by society because it was thought, rightly or wrongly, that society as a whole would benefit by granting them. But in any particular situation, we have to ask: are we really better off granting such license? What kind of act are we licensing a person to do?
The case of programs today is very different from that of books a hundred years ago. The fact that the easiest way to copy a program is from one neighbor to another, the fact that a program has both source code and object code which are distinct, and the fact that a program is used rather than read and enjoyed, combine to create a situation in which a person who enforces a copyright is harming society as a whole both materially and spiritually; in which a person should not do so regardless of whether the law enables him to.
“Competition makes things get done better.”
The paradigm of competition is a race: by rewarding the winner, we encourage everyone to run faster. When capitalism really works this way, it does a good job; but its defenders are wrong in assuming it always works this way. If the runners forget why the reward is offered and become intent on winning, no matter how, they may find other strategies—such as, attacking other runners. If the runners get into a fist fight, they will all finish late.
Proprietary and secret software is the moral equivalent of runners in a fist fight. Sad to say, the only referee we’ve got does not seem to object to fights; he just regulates them (“For every ten yards you run, you can fire one shot”). He really ought to break them up, and penalize runners for even trying to fight.
“Won’t everyone stop programming without a monetary incentive?”
Actually, many people will program with absolutely no monetary incentive. Programming has an irresistible fascination for some people, usually the people who are best at it. There is no shortage of professional musicians who keep at it even though they have no hope of making a living that way.
But really this question, though commonly asked, is not appropriate to the situation. Pay for programmers will not disappear, only become less. So the right question is, will anyone program with a reduced monetary incentive? My experience shows that they will.
For more than ten years, many of the world’s best programmers worked at the Artificial Intelligence Lab for far less money than they could have had anywhere else. They got many kinds of non-monetary rewards: fame and appreciation, for example. And creativity is also fun, a reward in itself.
Then most of them left when offered a chance to do the same interesting work for a lot of money.
What the facts show is that people will program for reasons other than riches; but if given a chance to make a lot of money as well, they will come to expect and demand it. Low-paying organizations do poorly in competition with high-paying ones, but they do not have to do badly if the high-paying ones are banned.
“We need the programmers desperately. If they demand that we stop helping our neighbors, we have to obey.”
You’re never so desperate that you have to obey this sort of demand. Remember: millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute!
“Programmers need to make a living somehow.”
In the short run, this is true. However, there are plenty of ways that programmers could make a living without selling the right to use a program. This way is customary now because it brings programmers and businessmen the most money, not because it is the only way to make a living. It is easy to find other ways if you want to find them. Here are a number of examples.
A manufacturer introducing a new computer will pay for the porting of operating systems onto the new hardware.
The sale of teaching, hand-holding and maintenance services could also employ programmers.
People with new ideas could distribute programs as freeware(9), asking for donations from satisfied users, or selling hand-holding services. I have met people who are already working this way successfully.
Users with related needs can form users’ groups, and pay dues. A group would contract with programming companies to write programs that the group’s members would like to use.
All sorts of development can be funded with a Software Tax:
Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay x percent of the price as a software tax. The government gives this to an agency like the NSF to spend on software development.
But if the computer buyer makes a donation to software development himself, he can take a credit against the tax. He can donate to the project of his own choosing—often, chosen because he hopes to use the results when it is done. He can take a credit for any amount of donation up to the total tax he had to pay.
The total tax rate could be decided by a vote of the payers of the tax, weighted according to the amount they will be taxed on.
The consequences:
In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the post-scarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling, robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be able to make a living from programming.
We have already greatly reduced the amount of work that the whole society must do for its actual productivity, but only a little of this has translated itself into leisure for workers because much nonproductive activity is required to accompany productive activity. The main causes of this are bureaucracy and isometric struggles against competition. Free software will greatly reduce these drains in the area of software production. We must do this, in order for technical gains in productivity to translate into less work for us.
Footnotes
- August 26th, 1991: Linus Torvalds, then a 21-year-old student at the University of Helsinki, Finland, announced the development of an Operating System based on his Minix-like kernel (later called Linux) and GNU software, in a post at comp.os.minix, a newsgroup on Usenetsource:
[+ show][- hide]
Path: gmdzi!unido!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!uunet!mcsun!news.funet.fi!hydra!klaava!torvalds
From: torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: What would you like to see most in minix?
Summary: small poll for my new operating system
Keywords: 386, preferences
Message-ID: <1991Aug25.205708.9541@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Date: 25 Aug 91 20:57:08 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 20Hello everybody out there using minix -
I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and
professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones. This has been brewing
since april, and is starting to get ready. I'd like any feedback on
things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat
(same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons)
among other things).I've currently ported bash(1.08) and gcc(1.40), and things seem to work.
This implies that I'll get something practical within a few months, and
I'd like to know what features most people would want. Any suggestions
are welcome, but I won't promise I'll implement them
Linus (torvalds@kruuna.helsinki.fi)
PS. Yes - it's free of any minix code, and it has a multi-threaded fs.
It is NOT protable (uses 386 task switching etc), and it probably never
will support anything other than AT-harddisks, as that's all I have
.
- May 5th, 1992: Linus releases Linux Kernel under GNU’s GPLsource
[+ show][- hide]
RELEASE NOTES FOR LINUX v0.12This is file mostly contains info on changed features of Linux, and
using old versions as a help-reference might be a good idea.COPYRIGHT
The Linux copyright will change: I’ve had a couple of requests to make
it compatible with the GNU copyleft, removing the “you may not
distribute it for money” condition. I agree. I propose that the
copyright be changed so that it confirms to GNU – pending approval of
the persons who have helped write code. I assume this is going to be no
problem for anybody: If you have grievances (“I wrote that code assuming
the copyright would stay the same”) mail me. Otherwise The GNU copyleft
takes effect as of the first of February. If you do not know the gist
of the GNU copyright – read it.…
- July 16th, 1993: Slackware Linux Distribution was officially announced by Patrick Volkerdingsource
[+ show][- hide]
Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!bf703
From: bf703@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Patrick J. Volkerding)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: ANNOUNCE: Slackware Linux 1.00
Date: 17 Jul 1993 00:16:36 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <227gd4$jtq@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
Reply-To: bf703@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Patrick J. Volkerding)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.eduThe Slackware Linux distribution (v. 1.00) is now available for
anonymous FTP. This is a complete installation system designed for
systems with a 3.5" boot floppy. It has been tested extensively with
a 386/IDE system. The standard kernel included does not support SCSI,
but if there's a great demand, I might be persuaded to compile a few
custom kernels to put up for FTP.This release is based largely on the SLS system, but has been enhanced and
modified substantially. There are two main disk series, A (13 disks) and
X (11 disks). Some of the features:Series A:
About what you'd expect from SLS series A, B, and C. Plus:
Source for the Linux DOS emulator version 0.49.
The FAQ for kernel level 99pl10.
Kernel source and image at .99pl11 Alpha.
[compiled with these options: math emulation support, normal hard drive
support, TCP/IP, System V IPC, -m486, minix fs, ext2 fs, msdos fs, nfs,
proc support, and PS/2 style mouse support. You may need to recompile if
you have some other type of busmouse. The kernel was compiled with libc
4.4.1, g++ 2.4.5]
The new keytable utilities.
The NET-2 networking package, preconfigured to use loopback.
A public domain version of ksh, and tcsh 6.04 (with the bugs worked out)
GNU gcc, g++, and Objective-C at versions 2.4.5
Includes and libraries at version 4.4.1
mailx, quota utilities, experimental winapi source, sound drivers.
The TCL toolkit and samples.In addition, the installation program has been improved to offer more
information about the packages (and the installation procedure itself)
as you install.The install program can also automatically install LILO, configuring it
to boot either from your master boot record or from OS/2's Boot Manager.Series X:
Also, all the packages you would get in the SLS X series, plus:
XFree-86 version 1.3.
Open Look Virtual Window Manager made the default window manager.
XS3 server offers support for S3 based video cards.
XV 3.00 Image viewer is included.
PEX files from the XFree-86 distribution are included.Although TEX support is not included in the Slackware release, the you may
install the SLS T series from the install program.At this point, the install disk itself is running .99pl8. I'm working on it :^)
Also, installation from other than a 3.5" floppy has not been tested, but might
work. 5.25" floppy will not work because of file sizes. At this point, I have
no plans to support a 5.25" version.How to get the Slackware(tm) release:
The Slackware release may be obtained be anonymous FTP from
mhd3.moorhead.msus.edu in directory /pub/linux/slackware. At least initially,
this release will be in the form of 3.5" disk images which should be copied
to floppies using the RAWRITE.EXE program, or dd under Linux.Please note that our FTP software does not support limiting the number of
concurrent anonymous logins. PLEASE try to go easy on this machine. If things
get out of hand, access may be restricted.Other sites are, of course, welcome to help out with the load by mirroring
the distribution.If you find any problems with the distribution, or if you have any suggestions
for improvements, please let me know. If you know of more up-to-date versions
of software in the distribution, I'd like to hear about that, too.--
Patrick Volkerding
volkerdi@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu
bf703@cleveland.freenet.edu
- August 16th, 1993: The Debian Project was officially founded by Ian Murdocksource
[+ show][- hide]
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development
Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!portal!imurdock
From: imurdock@shell.portal.com (Ian A Murdock)
Subject: New release under development; suggestions requested
Message-ID:
Sender: news@unix.portal.com
Nntp-Posting-Host: jobe.unix.portal.com
Organization: Portal Communications Company -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/973-8091 (data)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1993 13:05:37 GMT
Lines: 86Fellow Linuxers,This is just to announce the imminent completion of a brand-new Linux release,
which I'm calling the Debian Linux Release. This is a release that I have put
together basically from scratch; in other words, I didn't simply make some
changes to SLS and call it a new release. I was inspired to put together this
release after running SLS and generally being dissatisfied with much of it,
and after much altering of SLS I decided that it would be easier to start
from scratch. The base system is now virtually complete (though I'm still
looking around to make sure that I grabbed the most recent sources for
everything), and I'd like to get some feedback before I add the "fancy" stuff.Please note that this release is not yet completed and may not be for several
more weeks; however, I thought I'd post now to perhaps draw a few people out
of the woodwork. Specifically, I'm looking for:1) someone who will eventually be willing to allow me to upload the
release to their anonymous ftp-site. Please contact me.
Be warned that it will be rather large 2) comments, suggestions, advice, etc. from the Linux community. This
is your chance to suggest specific packages, series, or
anything you'd like to see part of the final release.Don't assume that because a package is in SLS that it will necessarily be
included in the Debian release! Things like ls and cat are a given, but if
there's anything that's in SLS that you couldn't live without please let me
know!I'd also like suggestions for specific features for the release. For example,
a friend of mine here suggested that undesired packages should be selected
BEFORE the installation procedure begins so the installer doesn't have to
babysit the installation. Suggestions along that line are also welcomed.What will make this release better than SLS? This:
1) Debian will be sleeker and slimmer. No more multiple binaries and
manpages.
2) Debian will contain the most up-to-date of everything. The system
will be easy to keep up-to-date with a 'upgrading' script in
the base system which will allow complete integration of
upgrade packages.
3) Debian will contain a installation procedure that doesn't need to
be babysat; simply install the basedisk, copy the distribution
disks to the harddrive, answer some question about what
packages you want or don't want installed, and let the machine
install the release while you do more interesting things.
4) Debian will contain a system setup procedure that will attempt to
setup and configure everything from fstab to Xconfig.
5) Debian will contain a menu system that WORKS... menu-driven
package installation and upgrading utility, menu-driven
system setup, menu-driven help system, and menu-driven
system administration.
6) Debian will make Linux easier for users who don't have access to the
Internet. Currently, users are stuck with whatever comes with
SLS. Non-Internet users will have the option of receiving
periodic upgrade packages to apply to their system. They will
also have the option of selecting from a huge library of
additional packages that will not be included in the base
system. This library will contain packages like the S3
X-server, nethack and Seyon; basically packages that you and I
can ftp but non-netters cannot access.
7) Debian will be extensively documented (more than just a few
READMEs).
As I put together Debian, I am keeping a meticulous record of
where I got everything. This will allow the end-user to
not only know where to get the source, but whether or not
the most recent version is a part of Debian. This record
will help to keep the Debian release as up-to-date as possible.
9) Lots more, but I'll detail later...Anyway, I'll provide more specifics in a week or so after I receive enough
replies.Please, all replies by mail. I'll post a followup. If you wish to discuss
this in the newsgroup, please don't turn it into a flamewar. Until later,
Ian
--
Ian Murdock Internet: imurdock@shell.portal.com
The Linux WarehousePlease mail me for more information on the status of the Debian Linux R
- July 4th, 1997: The Debian Project launches the “Debian Social Contract” (ratified next day). source:
[+ show][- hide]
To: debian-announce@lists.debian.org
Subject: Debian's "Social Contract" with the Free Software Community
From: bruce@debian.org (Bruce Perens)
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 97 22:32 PDT
Message-id: <m0wkNSr-00IS1iC@debian.org>
Reply-to: Bruce Perens <bruce@debian.org>DEBIAN'S "SOCIAL CONTRACT" WITH THE FREE SOFTWARE COMMUNITY
We are Software In The Public Interest, producers of the Debian
GNU/Linux system. This is the "social contract" we offer to the
free software community.1. Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software
We promise to keep the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution entirely free
software. As there are many definitions of free software, we
include the guidelines we use to determine if software is "free" below.
We will support our users who develop and run non-free software on
Debian, but we will never make the system depend on an item of non-free
software.2. We Will Give Back to the Free Software Community
When we write new components of the Debian system, we will license them
as free software. We will make the best system we can, so that free
software will be widely distributed and used. We will feed back
bug-fixes, improvements, user requests, etc. to the "upstream" authors
of software included in our system.3. We Won't Hide Problems
We will keep our entire bug-report database open for public view at
all times. Reports that users file on-line will immediately become
visible to others.4. Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software
We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free-software
community. We will place their interests first in our priorities. We
will support the needs of our users for operation in many different
kinds of computing environment. We won't object to commercial software
that is intended to run on Debian systems, and we'll allow others to
create value-added distributions containing both Debian and commercial
software, without any fee from us. To support these goals, we will
provide an integrated system of high-quality, 100% free software, with
no legal restrictions that would prevent these kinds of use.5. Programs That Don't Meet Our Free-Software Standards
We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of programs
that don't conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
We have created "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our FTP archive
for this software. The software in these directories is not part of
the Debian system, although it has been configured for use with Debian.
We encourage CD manufacturers to read the licenses of software packages
in these directories and determine if they can distribute that software
on their CDs. Thus, although non-free software isn't a part of Debian,
we support its use, and we provide infrastructure (such as
our bug-tracking system and mailing lists) for non-free software
packages.THE DEBIAN FREE SOFTWARE GUIDELINES
1. Free Redistribution
The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate
software distribution containing programs from several different
sources. The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such
sale.2. Source Code
The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in
source code as well as compiled form.3. Derived Works
The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow
them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original
software.4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified
form _only_ if the license allows the distribution of "patch files"
with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at build
time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built
from modified source code. The license may require derived works to
carry a different name or version number from the original software.
(This is a compromise. The Debian group encourages all authors to not
restrict any files, source or binary, from being modified.)5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of
persons.6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program
in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the
program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic
research.7. Distribution of License
The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the
program is redistributed without the need for execution of an
additional license by those parties.8. License Must Not Be Specific to Debian
The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's
being part of a Debian system. If the program is extracted from Debian
and used or distributed without Debian but otherwise within the terms
of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed
should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with
the Debian system.9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software
The license must not place restrictions on other software that is
distributed along with with the licensed software. For example, the
license must not insist that all other programs distributed on the
same medium must be free software.10. Example Licenses
The "GPL", "BSD", and "Artistic" licenses are examples of licenses
that we consider "free".===================================================================
The concept of a Linux distribution stating its "social contract with
the free software community" was suggested to me by Ean Schussler. I
composed a draft, and then it was refined by the Debian developers in
e-mail confernce during most of June. They then voted to approve it as
our publicly stated policy. We hope that other software projects,
including other Linux distributions, will use this document as a model.
We will gladly grant permission for any such use.Respectfully Submitted
Bruce Perens
Debian Project Leader
- More to come…source
Comments are closed.