This is Info file ../info/emacs, produced by Makeinfo version 1.68 from
the input file emacs.texi.

   This is the thirteenth edition of the `GNU Emacs Manual', updated
for Emacs version 20.3

INFO-DIR-SECTION Editors
START-INFO-DIR-ENTRY
* Emacs: (emacs).	The extensible self-documenting text editor.
END-INFO-DIR-ENTRY

   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.


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.

