How to get rid of non-free packers?
When I run command vrms in my Debian GNU/Linux, most of those non-free packages it finds are packers and/or unpackers. How about you? I like to listen to music modules made under Amiga and many of those modules are distributed in Aminet as LHA-archives. Sometimes I use DOS and its software may be distributed as ARJ- or RAR-archives. Of course free GUI-software like FileRoller can unpack many formats, but actually most of them are just graphical front-ends for command-line archivers, both free and non-free. It is not very bad thing if we can't create archives in formats like ACE, ARJ, LHA or RAR with free software. But it is more important to have free software for unpacking of those archives. If we want to create new archives, we can always use free software like GNU tar, gzip and Bzip2 and tell other people to use some free or non-free software to unpack them. .tar-, .tar.gz-, .gz- and even .bz2- and .tar.bz2-files are well understood by many general-purpose archivers, like Winzip, PowerArchiver, UltimateZip and Stuffit. And GNU Tar, gzip and Bzip2 themselves have been ported to many Operating systems already (Unixes (both free and proprietary), Windows, MacOS, AmigaOS, OS/2 etc.)). I have collected many links to archivers in the end of this WWW-page: http://www.cc.jyu.fi/~juhtolv/mswordmail.html But now back to the original problem: * * * ZOO: /usr/share/doc/zoo/copyright says: Currently, all extract-only programs, and all supporting utili- ties, are fully in the public domain and are expected to remain so for the forseeable future. So, where is that public-domain software for extracting ZOO-files? Somebody must find it and then create Debian-package of it. IMHO creating new ZOO-archives is not very important for us. * * * ARJ: Here is free implementation of it: http://testcase.newmail.ru/ It is under GNU GPL. I think it can also create ARJ-archives. * * * RAR: http://www.unrarlib.org/ This is kinda complicated. It is dual-licenced software. One of those licences is GNU GPL. But please read that FAQ: http://www.unrarlib.org/faq.html It is just a library for extracting RAR-files. So somebody must create some commandline tool that can unpack RAR-files and uses unrarlib for that. Then somebody can create Debian-package of both unrarlib and that commandline tool. I don't know, if source code of that library has some code from Eugene Roschal. * * * LHA: Here is relevant sections from /usr/share/doc/lha/copyright Clip here Translated License Statement (translated by GOTO Masanori [EMAIL PROTECTED]): It's free to distribute on the network, but if you distribute for the people who cannot access the network (by magazine or CD-ROM), please send E-Mail (Inter-Net address) to the author before the distribution. That's well where this software is appeard. If you cannot do, you must send me the E-Mail later. Original Source Code License Statement: /*Copyright (C) MCMLXXXIX Yooichi.Tagawa */ /*ModifiedNobutaka Watazaki */ /* Thanks to H.Yoshizaki. (MS-DOS LHarc)*/ Clip here I think, only way to get free unpacking software for LHA-files is to negotiate with those Japanese persons. Here are some URL of Japanese LHA-software: http://shibuya.cool.ne.jp/lha/ http://www2m.biglobe.ne.jp/~dolphin/lha/lha.htm How about contacting authors of AmigaOS-versions of LHA? http://lha.warped.com/index.html Maybe they could release those sources under some free licence and then somebody could port them to Unix? * * * ACE: http://www.winace.com/ They provide some statically linked Linux-binary for unpacking ACE-archives. If that file-format is not very secret, somebody might be able to create free unpacking-software for ACE-files. But feel free to negotiate with authors of WinAce. * * * ARC: This is very old archive-format. We only need some way to unpack those files. Fortunately, this was just announced at c.o.l.a: http://rus.members.beeb.net/nomarch.html It is meant to be free replacement for arc. It is under GNU GPL. It can also unpack Spark-files (common under Acorn Archimedes). * * * P.S: I don't subscribe to mailing-lists of Debian, so please Cc: your replies to me. And I am not Debian developer. -- Juhapekka naula Tolvanen * * University of Jyväskylä * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cc.jyu.fi/~juhtolv/index.html * * * * STRAIGHT BUT NOT NARROW!! Vesi hakkaa minua maahan, kuin tuhat lekaa ja miljoona vasaraa. Niinkuin lauletaan, niin happi räjähtää ja kauniista kaunein kädet ojentaa. Apulanta
Re: How to get rid of non-free packers?
So, where is that public-domain software for extracting ZOO-files? Somebody must find it and then create Debian-package of it. IMHO creating new ZOO-archives is not very important for us. IIRC, the ZOO extracters were Ooz and Looz.
Re: How to get rid of non-free packers?
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 04:01:15PM +0300, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote: When I run command vrms in my Debian GNU/Linux, most of those non-free packages it finds are packers and/or unpackers. While not the best team in their league, I think you'll find that even the Packers aren't so bad that they play for free. /me grins, ducks, runs, and watches that one go over the heads of everyone outside the U.S. -- G. Branden Robinson| Debian GNU/Linux | Music is the brandy of the damned. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- George Bernard Shaw http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | pgpFDuN8UEQQ1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to get rid of non-free packers?
On Fri, 23 Aug 2002, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote: When I run command vrms in my Debian GNU/Linux, most of those non-free packages it finds are packers and/or unpackers. How about you? I like to There may be patent issues. I'd check with the authors of the archivers. Additionally reading the compression newsgroup FAQ may provide some information regarding archivers and patents. Mark Nelson also recently commented that Unisys's patent on LWZ will be expiring soon. I'd check into that if it's applicable to any archiver you're looking at. A good list of archivers for DOS/Windows and Macs can be found through http://www.compression.ca and http://www.datacompression.info It is not very bad thing if we can't create archives in formats like ACE, ARJ, LHA or RAR with free software. But it is more important to have free software for unpacking of those archives. If we want to create new archives, we can always use free software like GNU tar, gzip and Bzip2 and tell other people to use some free or non-free software to unpack them. .tar-, .tar.gz-, .gz- and even .bz2- and .tar.bz2-files are well understood by many general-purpose archivers, like Winzip, PowerArchiver, UltimateZip and Stuffit. And GNU Tar, gzip and Bzip2 themselves have been ported to many Operating systems already (Unixes (both free and proprietary), Windows, MacOS, AmigaOS, OS/2 etc.)). In http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2002/debian-user-200207/msg04836.html I talk a bit about archivers and compression. An interesting archiver that I'd like to become part of debian is Charles Bloom's ppmz2 (found at http://www.cbloom.com ), but I believe it's license is currently not Debian compatible (it may be good for non-free). ZOO: IMHO creating new ZOO-archives is not very important for us. Some BBS sysops (if there still are any) may require zoo, especially for fidonet like networks. ARJ: http://testcase.newmail.ru/ It is under GNU GPL. I think it can also create ARJ-archives. https://sourceforge.net/projects/arj is also under the GNU GPL and is worth looking at too. RAR: http://www.unrarlib.org/ that commandline tool. I don't know, if source code of that library has some code from Eugene Roschal. Maybe it's worth asking Eugene Roschal (roshal at rarlab.com)? I'd check the resources available at http://www.rarlab.com/rar_add.htm such as http://www.rarlab.com/rar/unrarsrc.tar.gz tucow's gpl'd console un-rar may be based on this code. LHA: If desired I'll check more into this archiver (again useful in ways zoo is useful). ACE: They provide some statically linked Linux-binary for unpacking ACE-archives. If that file-format is not very secret, somebody might be able to create free unpacking-software for ACE-files. But feel free to negotiate with authors of WinAce. Worth a try if anyone feels this is worth while. I haven't really seen much packed with ace and ace doesn't rank well on http://www.compression.ca ARC: This is very old archive-format. We only need some way to unpack those files. Fortunately, this was just announced at c.o.l.a: http://rus.members.beeb.net/nomarch.html It is meant to be free replacement for arc. It is under GNU GPL. It can also unpack Spark-files (common under Acorn Archimedes). Interesting. For several people to be involved I would image that research relating to patents and other lha archivers would have already been done so I won't do any checking unless requested to. Drew Daniels I'm looking for work. If you can help see: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~umdanie8/resume.html
Re: How to get rid of non-free packers?
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 04:01:15PM +0300, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote: It is not very bad thing if we can't create archives in formats like ACE, ARJ, LHA or RAR with free software. But it is more important to Ideally, amavis needs access for all archive formats so it can check for viruses in E-Mail... ARC: This is very old archive-format. We only need some way to unpack those files. Fortunately, this was just announced at c.o.l.a: http://rus.members.beeb.net/nomarch.html It is meant to be free replacement for arc. It is under GNU GPL. It can also unpack Spark-files (common under Acorn Archimedes). This is already in Debian. P.S: I don't subscribe to mailing-lists of Debian, so please Cc: your replies to me. And I am not Debian developer. Please set your Mail-Followup-To: header correctly in future, that way mutt will automatically do the right thing. I think this is off-topic for debian-legal, but I am not sure. -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
