@mitchconner @dcc >There's no evidence that OpenBSD's installer installs proprietary software without asking.
https://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq4.html
>For licensing reasons, some firmware [sic] cannot be directly distributed with OpenBSD. The fw_update(8) tool will automatically download and install any missing firmware [sic], but this requires a working internet connection.
I can go and find the installer script again and point out where it runs "fw_update", but that'll take me a while.

This refers to the proprietary software that cannot be distributed with "Open"BSD, some proprietary software has license terms that allows for re-distribution and "Open"BSD ships those.

>While some binary firmware blobs may be included for hardware compatibility, these are typically clearly labeled and separated.
As this points out, the proprietary software is *included*, although it is labelled.

>The project is very cautious about including any non-free elements. If proprietary components are needed (like some firmware), they are usually clearly separated and documented.
But they *are* included despite being documented.

>However, characterizing OpenBSD as "not free software" based on these points is not accurate according to commonly accepted definitions of free software.
There's only really one definition of free software is; https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#four-freedoms

The proprietary software for peripheral devices that "Open"BSD distributes is part of the base system, which means that part of the base system doesn't respect all 4 freedoms and therefore "Open"BSD is not free software.

To be entirely honest, the only non-toy OS that has a commitment to freedom and as a result is free is GNU.


The only thing "Open"BSD developers actually promise is a gratis OS.