这是一个创建于 3811 天前的主题，其中的信息可能已经有所发展或是发生改变。
An unconfigurable software is not a free software
The NetworkManager in Ubuntu makes me annoyed. I guess here is right place to complain this issue.
It took me a whole evening to seek the configuration file for NetworkManager's dnsmasq (actually dnsmasq-base). The result was bad. Seems not a file for configuring 'dnsmasq', even though I created dnsmasq.conf in /etc .
The dnsmasq is not complete, being only dnsmas-base. What's worse is NetworkManager doesn't allow fully installed dnsmasq. See Ubuntu 's page:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Dnsmasq
\\\
Note that the package "dnsmasq" interferes with Network Manager which can use "dnsmasq-base" to provide DHCP services when sharing an internet connection. Therefore, if you use network manager (fine in simple set-ups only), then install dnsmasq-base, but not dnsmasq. If you have a more complicated set-up, uninstall network manager, use dnsmasq, or similar software (bind9, dhcpd, etc), and configure things by hand.
\\\
Are they conflicted? And why?
Thus I was looking for solution in NetworkManager. However there are very few places to configure NetworkManager except a few lines!!
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/NetworkManager
This is what I want to argue,
An unconfigurable / unhackable software is not a free software.
It limits the use for end users. Don't tell me that I can modify the source code or something. The majority of users don't have the ability to manage the C language. Right?
I know NetworkManager is so convenient to setup wifi connection. And I know I can just change to an alternative.
But the thing is, it finally just constrained the freedom for users!!! And it just interferes too much to the availability of other softwares.
The NetworkManager in Ubuntu makes me annoyed. I guess here is right place to complain this issue.
It took me a whole evening to seek the configuration file for NetworkManager's dnsmasq (actually dnsmasq-base). The result was bad. Seems not a file for configuring 'dnsmasq', even though I created dnsmasq.conf in /etc .
The dnsmasq is not complete, being only dnsmas-base. What's worse is NetworkManager doesn't allow fully installed dnsmasq. See Ubuntu 's page:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Dnsmasq
\\\
Note that the package "dnsmasq" interferes with Network Manager which can use "dnsmasq-base" to provide DHCP services when sharing an internet connection. Therefore, if you use network manager (fine in simple set-ups only), then install dnsmasq-base, but not dnsmasq. If you have a more complicated set-up, uninstall network manager, use dnsmasq, or similar software (bind9, dhcpd, etc), and configure things by hand.
\\\
Are they conflicted? And why?
Thus I was looking for solution in NetworkManager. However there are very few places to configure NetworkManager except a few lines!!
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/NetworkManager
This is what I want to argue,
An unconfigurable / unhackable software is not a free software.
It limits the use for end users. Don't tell me that I can modify the source code or something. The majority of users don't have the ability to manage the C language. Right?
I know NetworkManager is so convenient to setup wifi connection. And I know I can just change to an alternative.
But the thing is, it finally just constrained the freedom for users!!! And it just interferes too much to the availability of other softwares.
第 1 条附言 2015 年 11 月 16 日
本帖首发： http://trisquel.info/en/forum/unconfigurable-software-not-free-software
(内有详细讨论)
懒得再自己翻译成中文，将就下哈。
(内有详细讨论)
懒得再自己翻译成中文，将就下哈。
 | 1 caomu 2015 年 11 月 15 日 via Android  1 nm 罪大恶极 |
 | 2 yxzblue 2015 年 11 月 15 日 1 PO 主，你还在用 iphone.. |
 | 3 cxbig 2015 年 11 月 15 日 谁在乎是不是自由软件，只要它能给我的生活带来便利，用它所带来的问题不会超过我承受的底线。就可以了。完全自由的代价不是谁都担负得起。 |
 | 4 rashawn 2015 年 11 月 15 日 1 一个做了软件又不教会用户怎么配置软件的设计者，不是一个崇尚自由的设计者。 |
 | 5 terence4444 2015 年 11 月 15 日 via iPhone Android 够自由了吧，但没有自带权限管理（除最新版），和后台自启管理选项。 |
 | 6 jimzhong 2015 年 11 月 15 日 NetworkManager 对于桌面用户还是很方便的，特别是要连各种无线的笔记本电脑。 |
 | 7 honeycomb 2015 年 11 月 15 日 @terence4444 Android 不是自由软件，因为它的绝大部分代码不使用版左权许可发布 |
 | 8 V69EX 2015 年 11 月 15 日 1 我觉得一个软件最好兼容 IT 小白和有一定技能的人，对前者，展示的是一个封装好的界面，只需要简单的配置甚至不用配置即可运行，对后者，则开放各种隐藏在界面之后的配置。这才是最佳的软件。 像 iOS/Android 这类玩意，对 IT 人群来说，用起来是极不爽的，不仅不开放，还极力限制， Android 相对好一点，但绝对也属于傻瓜式系统。 |
 | 9 GNiux OP |
 | 12 ryd994 2015 年 11 月 16 日 via Android 1 “ Don't tell me that I can modify the source code or something. The majority of users don't have the ability to manage the C language. Right? ” 根据信息论，你要想获得修改源码那个级别的可定制性，那配置文件最终就会成为一门（类）编程语言。到时候你是不是又要说配置太麻烦的 freeware 不是 freeware ？ 如果你不想用，你可以不用，同时欢迎你提交改进代码。这不叫自由什么叫自由？你不会编程没关系，你可以雇佣专业的啊。难道写个 freeware 文档还要包含 C 语言从入门到精通么？你要 30 天版的还是 3 个月版的？ |
| 13 ryd994 2015 年 11 月 16 日 via Android 另外，你还是可以装独立的 dnsmasq 的，只要关掉 nm 自带的就行。 ipv4 改成手动，然后正常使用 dnsmasq 就行。 拉不出 xx 怪 xx |
 | 16 watcher 2015 年 11 月 16 日 是放纵软件... |
 | 17 mortal 2015 年 11 月 16 日 NW 是真的不好用。 |
 | 19 jiang42 2015 年 11 月 16 日 via iPhone 1 GNU 真是罪大恶极…… |
| 20 GNiux OP @ryd994 > 根据信息论，你要想获得修改源码那个级别的可定制性，那配置文件最终就会成为一门（类）编程语言。 请问这个结论是怎么推出的？根据信息论的什么？愿闻其详。 相反，借此，正是(用户)不想获得源代码级别的可定制性，才需要 human readable 的配置文件啊。否则都直接改源码好了。 |
| 21 GNiux OP 后来我发现我需要修正自己的论点，不讨论一个软件自由不自由了，而是说：一个无法配置的软件没有“尊重用户的自由”(respect your freedom)。 V2 检测有误 @Livid 。我用的是 WP :P |
| 22 GNiux OP 后来又琢磨，向 NM 这样的，对其他软件进行干涉（如限制其他软件的安装，或强制安装其他软件），都是在*限制用户的自主使用*。 这不就和 win 环境的各种流氓软件，一样了…… s*** 所以问题来了，在类 UNIX 发行版中，到现在有没有哪一款，真正实现了 UNIX 的哲学： do one thing and do it well 。不要干涉其他软件。 |
Select Language