On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Eric Auer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Seems like FreeDOS can be built with Watcom C and Borland C
>> Compiler only, both of which are non-free.
>
> I do not remember who said Watcom C but things which needed
> Borland C now often compile with the free-from-Borland-museum
> Turbo C and in addition we now often use OpenWatcom which is
> a free open source compiler based on released Watcom code :-)
>
> You should compile with Watcom C for DOS, but the Windows
> version might do, too. I never tried with the Linux version.
> I believe Jeremy Davis had a cronjob which compiled FreeDOS
> using OpenWatcom for Linux long ago...
>

If you don't remember the discussion about OpenWatcom C, then you have
a short memory. :-) We discussed updates to the FreeDOS Spec on this
list, a long time ago. You & I even had an off-list (!) follow-up
conversation where you reminded me to update the Spec with the new
information. I had updated the Spec on FD-DOC's wiki, but the edit got
blown away when you did one of your restores due to too much wiki
spam. The info got updated permanently when I moved content to the
FreeDOS Wiki on SourceForge.

The FreeDOS Spec says:

"Our reference C compiler is OpenWatcom C. (Borland C 3.1 was
originally chosen as the reference standard because this is the
compiler used to build the FreeDOS kernel. However, it is preferable
to use entirely free tools to create FreeDOS.)"
[...]
"This does not mean that everyone must use these tools to contribute
to FreeDOS. That would be counterproductive, as many users may prefer
other programs. Rather, this means that any C code must be compilable
on OpenWatcom C, and all Assembly must be assemble-able on NASM. Good
programming habits such as wise use of #ifdef statements will allow
you to do this."

http://apps.sourceforge.net/mediawiki/freedos/index.php?title=FreeDOS_Spec#Programming_tools


>> ask whether anyone's willing to help switching to free build
>> framework (dev86) and whether there are any known technical
>> difficulties with it?
>
> Yes - OpenWatcom is already free and I doubt that dev86 comes
> with a very classic 16/32 bit DOS apps" oriented C library...?
>

The problem for the Fedora Project is that the license used by
OpenWatcom is not "Free according to FSF. That means Fedora cannot use
OpenWatcom, so the OP is asking for alternatives that might meet the
FSF's standard.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Bad_Licenses

Indeed, the OpenWatcom license is the Sybase Open Watcom Public
License version 1.0. While this is listed at OSI's site
(http://opensource.org/licenses/sybase.php) it is listed in the
"Non-reusable licenses" category
(http://opensource.org/licenses/category).

The reason the OWPL1.0 is not "Free according to FSF" is (I think)
that the source code cannot be used by everyone. This is mentioned in
section 2.1 of the license:

"2.1 You may use, reproduce, display, perform, modify and distribute
Original Code, with or without Modifications, solely for Your internal
research and development and/or Personal Use, provided that in each
instance: [...]"

http://www.openwatcom.org/index.php/Open_Watcom_Public_License

While anyone can download and use the compiler, you can
use/reproduce/etc. the source code only for "internal research and
development" or for "Personal Use". More importantly, it means a
developer cannot download the source code, make changes to suit
his/her needs, and SHARE those changes with others.

Looking at the Free Software Definition (FSF):

    0.  The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).

    1. The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to
your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition
for this.

    2. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your
neighbor (freedom 2).

    3. The freedom to improve the program, and release your
improvements (and modified versions in general) to the public, so that
the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is
a precondition for this.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html


So the OWPL1.0 allows freedom 0 and freedom 1. But the license does
not fully allow freedom 2 and freedom 3. Hence it is not "Free
according to the FSF", and the Fedora Project guys have said they will
only allow projects whose licenses are totally Free, according to the
FSF.


-jh

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apps built with the Adobe(R) Flex(R) framework and Flex Builder(TM) are
powering Web 2.0 with engaging, cross-platform capabilities. Quickly and
easily build your RIAs with Flex Builder, the Eclipse(TM)based development
software that enables intelligent coding and step-through debugging.
Download the free 60 day trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-adobe-com
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Reply via email to