[Dev] Fwd: Re: Article: Chromium's subtle freedom flaws

jc_gargma jc_gargma at iserlohn-fortress.net
Tue May 9 15:20:49 GMT 2017

> Is this really an internal problem of Parabola? I say this because,
> what if other distros adopt qt5-webengine? then it will become a
> bigger problem not only for us, but for the other free distros too.
> Maybe we should discuss this with the FSF and/or the GNU Project, they
> could fork Chromium/Iridium/Ungoogled-chromium like they did with
> Icecat (like creating an "Icemium").
I fail to see how a libre Chromium relates to or resolves the blacklisting of 
qt5-webengine. There has still been no evidence posted as to how qt5-webengine 
is non-free, nor has anyone accusing qt5-webengine of being non-free reported 
their claims upstream to Qt to be fixed at the source. (pun intended)


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20170509/1881254c/attachment.sig>

More information about the Dev mailing list