This is Info file ../info/emacs, produced by Makeinfo-1.64 from the input file ../texi/emacs.texi. This is the thirteenth edition of the `GNU Emacs Manual', updated for Emacs version 20.3 Editors * Emacs: (emacs). The extensible self-documenting text editor. Published by the Free Software Foundation 59 Temple Place, Suite 330 Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA Copyright (C) 1985, 1986, 1987, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 Free Software Foundation, Inc. Permission is granted to make and distribute verbatim copies of this manual provided the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on all copies. Permission is granted to copy and distribute modified versions of this manual under the conditions for verbatim copying, provided also that the sections entitled "The GNU Manifesto", "Distribution" and "GNU General Public License" are included exactly as in the original, and provided that the entire resulting derived work is distributed under the terms of a permission notice identical to this one. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations of this manual into another language, under the above conditions for modified versions, except that the sections entitled "The GNU Manifesto", "Distribution" and "GNU General Public License" may be included in a translation approved by the Free Software Foundation instead of in the original English. ifinfo  File: emacs, Node: MS-DOS Input, Next: MS-DOS Display, Up: MS-DOS Keyboard and Mouse on MS-DOS ============================ The PC keyboard maps use the left ALT key as the META key. You have two choices for emulating the SUPER and HYPER keys: choose either the right CTRL key or the right ALT key by setting the variables `dos-hyper-key' and `dos-super-key' to 1 or 2 respectively. If neither `dos-super-key' nor `dos-hyper-key' is 1, then by default the right ALT key is also mapped to the META key. However, if the MS-DOS international keyboard support program `KEYB.COM' is installed, Emacs will *not* map the right ALT to META, since it is used for accessing characters like `~' and `@' on non-US keyboard layouts; in this case, you may only use the left ALT as META key. The variable `dos-keypad-mode' is a flag variable that controls what key codes are returned by keys in the numeric keypad. You can also define the keypad ENTER key to act like `C-j', by putting the following line into your `_emacs' file: ;; Make the Enter key from the Numeric keypad act as C-j. (define-key function-key-map [kp-enter] [?\C-j]) The key that is called DEL in Emacs (because that's how it is designated on most workstations) is known as BS (backspace) on a PC. That is why the PC-specific terminal initialization remaps the BS key to act as DEL; the DEL key is remapped to act as `C-d' for the same reasons. Emacs built for MS-DOS recognizes `C-BREAK' as a quit character, just like `C-g'. This is because Emacs cannot detect that you have typed `C-g' until it is ready for more input. As a consequence, you cannot use `C-g' to stop a running command (*note Quitting::.). By contrast, `C-BREAK' *is* detected as soon as you type it (as `C-g' is on other systems), so it can be used to stop a running command and for emergency escape (*note Emergency Escape::.). Emacs on MS-DOS supports a mouse (on the default terminal only). The mouse commands work as documented, including those that use menus and the menu bar (*note Menu Bar::.). Scroll bars don't work in MS-DOS Emacs. PC mice usually have only two buttons; these act as `Mouse-1' and `Mouse-2', but if you press both of them together, that has the effect of `Mouse-3'. Emacs built for MS-DOS supports clipboard operations when it runs on Windows. Commands that put text on the kill ring, or yank text from the ring, check the Windows clipboard first, just as Emacs does on X Windows (*note Mouse Commands::.). Only the primary selection and the cut buffer are supported by MS-DOS Emacs on Windows; the secondary selection always appears as empty. Due to the way clipboard access is implemented by Windows, the length of text you can put into the clipboard is limited by the amount of free DOS memory that is available to Emacs. Usually, up to 620KB of text can be put into the clipboard, but this limit depends on the system configuration and is lower if you run Emacs as a subprocess of another program. If the killed text does not fit, Emacs prints a message saying so, and does not put the text into the clipboard. The variable `dos-display-scancodes', when non-`nil', directs Emacs to display the ASCII value and the keyboard scan code of each keystroke; this feature serves as a complement to the `view-lossage' command, for debugging.  File: emacs, Node: MS-DOS Display, Next: MS-DOS File Names, Prev: MS-DOS Input, Up: MS-DOS Display on MS-DOS ================= Display on MS-DOS cannot use multiple fonts, but it does support multiple faces, each of which can specify a foreground and a background color. Therefore, you can get the full functionality of Emacs packages that use fonts (such as `font-lock', Enriched Text mode, and others) by defining the relevant faces to use different colors. Use the `list-colors-display' command (*note Frame Parameters::.) and the `list-faces-display' command (*note Faces::.) to see what colors and faces are available and what they look like. Multiple frames (*note Frames::.) are supported on MS-DOS, but they all overlap, so you only see a single frame at any given moment. That single visible frame occupies the entire screen. When you run Emacs from MS-Windows DOS box, you can make the visible frame smaller than the full screen, but Emacs still cannot display more than a single frame at a time. The `mode4350' command switches the display to 43 or 50 lines, depending on your hardware; the `mode25' command switches to the default 80x25 screen size. By default, Emacs only knows how to set screen sizes of 80 columns by 25, 28, 35, 40, 43 or 50 rows. However, if your video adapter has special video modes that will switch the display to other sizes, you can have Emacs support those too. When you ask Emacs to switch the frame to N rows by M columns dimensions, it checks if there is a variable called `screen-dimensions-NxM', and if so, uses its value (which must be an integer) as the video mode to switch to. (Emacs switches to that video mode by calling the BIOS `Set Video Mode' function with the value of `screen-dimensions-NxM' in the `AL' register.) For example, suppose your adapter will switch to 66x80 dimensions when put into video mode 85. Then you can make Emacs support this screen size by putting the following into your `_emacs' file: (setq screen-dimensions-66x80 85) Since Emacs on MS-DOS can only set the frame size to specific supported dimensions, it cannot honor every possible frame resizing request. When an unsupported size is requested, Emacs chooses the next larger supported size beyond the specified size. For example, if you ask for 36x80 frame, you will get 40x80 instead. The variables `screen-dimensions-NxM' are used only when they exactly match the specified size; the search for the next larger supported size ignores them. In the above example, even if your VGA supports 38x80 dimensions and you define a variable `screen-dimensions-38x80' with a suitable value, you will still get 40x80 screen when you ask for a 36x80 frame. If you want to get the 38x80 size in this case, you can do it by setting the variable named `screen-dimensions-36x80' with the same video mode value as `screen-dimensions-38x80'. Changing frame dimensions on MS-DOS has the effect of changing all the other frames to the new dimensions.  File: emacs, Node: MS-DOS File Names, Next: Text and Binary, Prev: MS-DOS Display, Up: MS-DOS File Names on MS-DOS ==================== MS-DOS normally uses a backslash, `\', to separate name units within a file name, instead of the slash used on other systems. Emacs on MS-DOS permits use of either slash or backslash, and also knows about drive letters in file names. On MS-DOS, file names are case-insensitive and limited to eight characters, plus optionally a period and three more characters. Emacs knows enough about these limitations to handle file names that were meant for other operating systems. For instance, leading dots `.' in file names are invalid in MS-DOS, so Emacs transparently converts them to underscores `_'; thus your default init file (*note Init File::.) is called `_emacs' on MS-DOS. Excess characters before or after the period are generally ignored by MS-DOS itself; thus, if you visit the file `LongFileName.EvenLongerExtension', you will silently get `longfile.eve', but Emacs will still display the long file name on the mode line. Other than that, it's up to you to specify file names which are valid under MS-DOS; the transparent conversion as described above only works on file names built into Emacs. The above restrictions on the file names on MS-DOS make it almost impossible to construct the name of a backup file (*note Backup Names::.) without losing some of the original file name characters. For example, the name of a backup file for `docs.txt' is `docs.tx~' even if single backup is used. If you run Emacs as a DOS application under Windows 9X, you can turn on support for long file names. If you do that, Emacs doesn't truncate file names or convert them to lower case; instead, it uses the file names that you specify, verbatim. To enable long file name support, set the environment variable `LFN' to `y' before starting Emacs. Unfortunately, Windows NT doesn't allow DOS programs to access long file names, so Emacs built for MS-DOS will only see their short 8+3 aliases. MS-DOS has no notion of home directory, so Emacs on MS-DOS pretends that the directory where it is installed is the value of `HOME' environment variable. That is, if your Emacs binary, `emacs.exe', is in the directory `c:/utils/emacs/bin', then Emacs acts as if `HOME' were set to `c:/utils/emacs'. In particular, that is where Emacs looks for the init file `_emacs'. With this in mind, you can use `~' in file names as an alias for the home directory, as you would in Unix. You can also set `HOME' variable in the environment before starting Emacs; its value will then override the above default behavior. Emacs on MS-DOS handles the directory name `/dev' specially, because of a feature in the emulator libraries of DJGPP that pretends I/O devices have names in that directory. We recommend that you avoid using an actual directory named `/dev' on any disk.  File: emacs, Node: Text and Binary, Next: MS-DOS Printing, Prev: MS-DOS File Names, Up: MS-DOS Text Files and Binary Files =========================== GNU Emacs uses newline characters to separate text lines. This is the convention used on Unix, on which GNU Emacs was developed, and on GNU systems since they are modeled on Unix. MS-DOS and MS-Windows normally use carriage-return linefeed, a two-character sequence, to separate text lines. (Linefeed is the same character as newline.) Therefore, convenient editing of typical files with Emacs requires conversion of these end-of-line (EOL) sequences. And that is what Emacs normally does: it converts carriage-return linefeed into newline when reading files, and converts newline into carriage-return linefeed when writing files. The same mechanism that handles conversion of international character codes does this conversion also (*note Coding Systems::.). One consequence of this special format-conversion of most files is that character positions as reported by Emacs (*note Position Info::.) do not agree with the file size information known to the operating system. Some kinds of files should not be converted, because their contents are not really text. Therefore, Emacs on MS-DOS distinguishes certain files as "binary files", and reads and writes them verbatim. (This distinction is not part of MS-DOS; it is made by Emacs only.) These include executable programs, compressed archives, etc. Emacs uses the file name to decide whether to treat a file as binary: the variable `file-name-buffer-file-type-alist' defines the file-name patterns that indicate binary files. Note that if a file name matches one of the patterns for binary files in `file-name-buffer-file-type-alist', Emacs uses the `no-conversion' coding system (*note Coding Systems::.) which turns off *all* coding-system conversions, not only the EOL conversion. In addition, if Emacs recognizes from a file's contents that it uses newline rather than carriage-return linefeed as its line separator, it does not perform conversion when reading or writing that file. Thus, you can read and edit files from Unix or GNU systems on MS-DOS with no special effort, and they will be left with their Unix-style EOLs. You can visit a file and specify whether to treat a file as text or binary using the commands `find-file-text' and `find-file-binary'. End-of-line conversion is part of the general coding system conversion mechanism, so another way to control whether to treat a file as text or binary is with the commands for specifying a coding system (*note Specify Coding::.). For example, `C-x RET c undecided-unix RET C-x C-f foobar.txt' visits the file `foobar.txt' without converting the EOLs. The mode line indicates whether end-of-line translation was used for the current buffer. Normally a colon appears after the coding system letter near the beginning of the mode line. If MS-DOS end-of-line translation is in use for the buffer, this character changes to a backslash. When you use NFS or Samba to access file systems that reside on computers using Unix or GNU systems, Emacs should not perform end-of-line translation on any files in these file systems-not even when you create a new file. To request this, designate these file systems as "untranslated" file systems by calling the function `add-untranslated-filesystem'. It takes one argument: the file system name, including a drive letter and optionally a directory. For example, (add-untranslated-filesystem "Z:") designates drive Z as an untranslated file system, and (add-untranslated-filesystem "Z:\\foo") designates directory `\foo' on drive Z as an untranslated file system. Most often you would use `add-untranslated-filesystem' in your `_emacs' file, or in `site-start.el' so that all the users at your site get the benefit of it. To countermand the effect of `add-untranslated-filesystem', use the function `remove-untranslated-filesystem'. This function takes one argument, which should be a string just like the one that was used previously with `add-untranslated-filesystem'.  File: emacs, Node: MS-DOS Printing, Next: MS-DOS Processes, Prev: Text and Binary, Up: MS-DOS Printing and MS-DOS =================== Printing commands, such as `lpr-buffer' (*note Hardcopy::.) and `ps-print-buffer' (*note Postscript::.) can work in MS-DOS by sending the output to one of the printer ports, if a Unix-style `lpr' program is unavailable. A few DOS-specific variables control how this works. If you want to use your local printer, printing on it in the usual DOS manner, then set the Lisp variable `dos-printer' to the name of the printer port--for example, `"PRN"', the usual local printer port (that's the default), or `"LPT2"' or `"COM1"' for a serial printer. You can also set `dos-printer' to a file name, in which case "printed" output is actually appended to that file. If you set `dos-printer' to `"NUL"', printed output is silently discarded (sent to the system null device). If you set `dos-printer' to a file name, it's best to use an absolute file name. Emacs changes the working directory according to the default directory of the current buffer, so if the file name in `dos-printer' is relative, you will end up with several such files, each one in the directory of the buffer from which the printing was done. The commands `print-buffer' and `print-region' call the `pr' program, or use special switches to the `lpr' program, to produce headers on each printed page. MS-DOS doesn't normally have these programs, so by default, the variable `lpr-headers-switches' is set so that the requests to print page headers are silently ignored. Thus, `print-buffer' and `print-region' produce the same output as `lpr-buffer' and `lpr-region', respectively. If you do have a suitable `pr' program (for example, from GNU Textutils), set `lpr-headers-switches' to `nil'; Emacs will then call `pr' to produce the page headers, and print the resulting output as specified by `dos-printer'. Finally, if you do have an `lpr' work-alike, you can set `print-region-function' to `nil'. Then Emacs uses `lpr' for printing, as on other systems. (If the name of the program isn't `lpr', set the `lpr-command' variable to specify where to find it.) A separate variable, `dos-ps-printer', defines how PostScript files should be printed. If its value is a string, it is used as the name of the device (or file) to which PostScript output is sent, just as `dos-printer' is used for non-PostScript printing. (These are two distinct variables in case you have two printers attached to two different ports, and only one of them is a PostScript printer.) If the value of `dos-ps-printer' is not a string, then the variables `ps-lpr-command' and `ps-lpr-switches' (*note Postscript::.) control how to print PostScript files. Thus, if you have a non-PostScript printer, you can set these variables to the name and the switches appropriate for a PostScript interpreter program (such as Ghostscript). For example, to use Ghostscript for printing on an Epson printer connected to `LPT2' port, put this on your `.emacs' file: (setq dos-ps-printer t) ; Anything but a string. (setq ps-lpr-command "c:/gs/gs386") (setq ps-lpr-switches '("-q" "-dNOPAUSE" "-sDEVICE=epson" "-r240x72" "-sOutputFile=LPT2" "-Ic:/gs" "-")) (This assumes that Ghostscript is installed in the `"c:/gs"' directory.)  File: emacs, Node: MS-DOS Processes, Next: Windows Processes, Prev: MS-DOS Printing, Up: MS-DOS Subprocesses on MS-DOS ====================== Because MS-DOS is a single-process "operating system," asynchronous subprocesses are not available. In particular, Shell mode and its variants do not work. Most Emacs features that use asynchronous subprocesses also don't work on MS-DOS, including spelling correction and GUD. When in doubt, try and see; commands that don't work print an error message saying that asynchronous processes aren't supported. Compilation under Emacs with `M-x compile', searching files with `M-x grep' and displaying differences between files with `M-x diff' do work, by running the inferior processes synchronously. This means you cannot do any more editing until the inferior process finishes. By contrast, Emacs compiled as native Windows application *does* support asynchronous subprocesses. *Note Windows Processes::. Printing commands, such as `lpr-buffer' (*note Hardcopy::.) and `ps-print-buffer' (*note Postscript::.), work in MS-DOS by sending the output to one of the printer ports. *Note MS-DOS Printing::. When you run a subprocess synchronously on MS-DOS, make sure the program terminates and does not try to read keyboard input. If the program does not terminate on its own, you will be unable to terminate it, because MS-DOS provides no general way to terminate a process. Pressing `C-c' or `C-BREAK' might sometimes help in these cases. Accessing files on other machines is not supported on MS-DOS. Other network-oriented commands such as sending mail, Web browsing, remote login, etc., don't work either, unless network access is built into MS-DOS with some network redirector. Dired on MS-DOS uses the `ls-lisp' package where other platforms use the system `ls' command. Therefore, Dired on MS-DOS supports only some of the possible options you can mention in the `dired-listing-switches' variable. The options that work are `-A', `-a', `-c', `-i', `-r', `-S', `-s', `-t', and `-u'.  File: emacs, Node: Windows Processes, Next: Windows System Menu, Prev: MS-DOS Processes, Up: MS-DOS Subprocesses on Windows 95 and NT ================================= Emacs compiled as a native Windows application (as opposed to the DOS version) includes full support for asynchronous subprocesses. In the Windows version, synchronous and asynchronous subprocesses work fine on both Windows 95 and Windows NT as long as you run only 32-bit Windows applications. However, when you run a DOS application in a subprocess, you may encounter problems or be unable to run the application at all; and if you run two DOS applications at the same time in two subprocesses, you may have to reboot your system. Since the standard command interpreter (and most command line utilities) on Windows 95 are DOS applications, these problems are significant when using that system. But there's nothing we can do about them; only Microsoft can fix them. If you run just one DOS application subprocess, the subprocess should work as expected as long as it is "well-behaved" and does not perform direct screen access or other unusual actions. If you have a CPU monitor application, your machine will appear to be 100% busy even when the DOS application is idle, but this is only an artifact of the way CPU monitors measure processor load. You must terminate the DOS application before you start any other DOS application in a different subprocess. Emacs is unable to interrupt or terminate a DOS subprocess. The only way you can terminate such a subprocess is by giving it a command that tells its program to exit. If you attempt to run two DOS applications at the same time in separate subprocesses, the second one that is started will be suspended until the first one finishes, even if either or both of them are asynchronous. If you can go to the first subprocess, and tell it to exit, the second subprocess should continue normally. However, if the second subprocess is synchronous, Emacs itself will be hung until the first subprocess finishes. If it will not finish without user input, then you have no choice but to reboot if you are running on Windows 95. If you are running on Windows NT, you can use a process viewer application to kill the appropriate instance of ntvdm instead (this will terminate both DOS subprocesses). If you have to reboot Windows 95 in this situation, do not use the `Shutdown' command on the `Start' menu; that usually hangs the system. Instead, type `CTL-ALT-DEL' and then choose `Shutdown'. That usually works, although it may take a few minutes to do its job.  File: emacs, Node: Windows System Menu, Prev: Windows Processes, Up: MS-DOS Using the System Menu on Windows ================================ Emacs compiled as a native Windows application normally turns off the Windows feature that tapping the ALT key invokes the Windows menu. The reason is that the ALT also serves as META in Emacs. When using Emacs, users often press the META key temporarily and then change their minds; if this has the effect of bringing up the Windows menu, it alters the meaning of subsequent commands. Many users find this frustrating. You can reenable Windows's default handling of tapping the ALT key by setting `w32-pass-alt-to-system' to a non-`nil' value.  File: emacs, Node: Manifesto, Prev: MS-DOS, Up: Top The GNU Manifesto ***************** The GNU Manifesto which appears below was written by Richard Stallman at the beginning of the GNU project, to ask for participation and support. For the first few years, it was updated in minor ways to account for developments, but now it seems best to leave it unchanged as most people have seen it. Since that time, we have learned about certain common misunderstandings that different wording could help avoid. Footnotes added in 1993 help clarify these points. For up-to-date information about the available GNU software, please see the latest issue of the GNU's Bulletin. The list is much too long to include here. 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. 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 ====================== 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.(2) 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.(3) 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?(4) "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.(5) "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 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 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, 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: * The computer-using community supports software development. * This community decides what level of support is needed. * Users who care which projects their share is spent on can choose this for themselves. 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 ---------- (1) The wording here was careless. The intention was that nobody would have to pay for *permission* to use the GNU system. But the words don't make this clear, and people often interpret them as saying that copies of GNU should always be distributed at little or no charge. That was never the intent; later on, the manifesto mentions the possibility of companies providing the service of distribution for a profit. Subsequently I have learned to distinguish carefully between "free" in the sense of freedom and "free" in the sense of price. Free software is software that users have the freedom to distribute and change. Some users may obtain copies at no charge, while others pay to obtain copies--and if the funds help support improving the software, so much the better. The important thing is that everyone who has a copy has the freedom to cooperate with others in using it. (2) This is another place I failed to distinguish carefully between the two different meanings of "free". The statement as it stands is not false--you can get copies of GNU software at no charge, from your friends or over the net. But it does suggest the wrong idea. (3) Several such companies now exist. (4) The Free Software Foundation raises most of its funds from a distribution service, although it is a charity rather than a company. If *no one* chooses to obtain copies by ordering from the FSF, it will be unable to do its work. But this does not mean that proprietary restrictions are justified to force every user to pay. If a small fraction of all the users order copies from the FSF, that is sufficient to keep the FSF afloat. So we ask users to choose to support us in this way. Have you done your part? (5) A group of computer companies recently pooled funds to support maintenance of the GNU C Compiler.