btsync, twonki, Alt-F -- who is the culprit?
Clearly not Alt-F -- is has some 180 different software packages, all compiled from source code, and more could be added if I or someone else had the time or inclination.
Some software packages might be difficult to compile for Alt-F, but it can be done as long as they are open source, i.e., its source code is freely available.
"Free" here means "Freedom", not money. Free software means free to use, study, copy, change, or re-distribute. Not all open-source software is free in this broad sense, it depends on its particular license. Some companies make the source code available, but prohibits its modification or re-distribution.
btsync and twonky are closed source, they are delivered in pre-compiled form for specific platforms, chosen by the company, and they will only run on these selected platforms and not on any other. There is nothing that one can do; if lobbying, then lobby btsync or twonky to distribute their products pre-compiled for Alt-F, or better, to make it open-source -- some commercial companies do it!
krysus don't know what he is talking about.
Alt-F could be compiled for glibc, but the resulting binaries would not fit the available flash-memory space.
uclibc is an alternative to glibc, developed specifically for embedded devices with small amounts of memory.
The DNS-325 and other boxes uses glibc. The DNS-325 has 128MB of flash memory, the DNS-323 has 8MB!
Making (a greatly stripped down) Samba fits the available flash-memory was a feat! Samba-3.6 just don't fit.
Alt-F uses BuildRoot as its build system, and BuildRoot is free software (Freedom) and supports glibc (also Free), that would not be an issue.
But using glibc is not enough to provide compatibility with pre-compiled binaries -- the compiler tools (the toolchain, also Free) has to be also compatible, and the version and options used when building glibc has to be exactly the same -- Last time I checked the twonky download site they had, for a given version of twonky, some two dozens of binaries, some of them with only small variations.
optware for the DNS-323, e.g., can't run under Alt-F, although it is uclibc based and runs under the vendor's firmware. Only minor changes in the toolchain makes most of its binaries impossible to run under Alt-F. ffp binaries can, as they use a clever library trick.
If anyone wants to use those pre-build binaries, then they can install Debian (also Free) on disk on their boxes. Alt-F even lets you install and run Debian, so you can try it, and if satisfied flash it!
Alt-F even accepts the vendor's firmware, so you can always go back to it.
So all this has to do really is with Freedom.
Not at all.
Being web based Alt-F is mostly independent on glibc/uclibc or even platform, although some porting effort would be needed.
Alt-F is dependent on linux and busybox only (both being also Free)
There are some web-based alternatives to Alt-F out there, most or all of them has to be installed on disk, not on flash-memory.
Glad you ask