[ILUG-BOM] Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
To be very precise, there isn't a Free alternative to gcc yet. If the GNU folks will continue with the whole GNU/Linux thing, I might just get bugged enough to write a BSD licensed compiler. Does that mean you would have absolutely no problem at all in exploitative corporates taking your hard work, (sometimes) turning it into crap and making a huge pile of cash on it ? Talking about freedom and practicing it is not just a momentary thing but has to be a continuous and perpetual struggle. If we leave the option for people to take what they want and commercialise it, they will never bother about freedom and the cause is diminished. If the restriction of keeping the released work also free is put, it makes them at least consult lawyers and think on ``Why did this person/group decide to do things this way ? and that is the beginning of victory because you start to make people think about things they otherwise take for granted. That's the stuff revolutions are made of. Then of course we are in a philosophical quandary of ``restricting freedom to preserve freedom. My simple answer to that is, GPL has proved that it CAN work and IS working. But my whole point is that GNU/Linux is pretty much useless to me. Regardless of how essential gcc is. If the GNU project gets credits, everyone else deserves the same amount of time. Hmm... is it not so that in all GNU projects painstaiking efforts are made to credit every single person who contributed to any project. In fact in the GNU C manual itself they are about 20 odd pages in the pdf crediting every person individually with the work they did. This includes BSD guys who did the BSD ports. This happens irrespective of what the personal beliefs are(i don't recall seeing a tag near anyone's name stating with GNU or without GNU :-) ) Therefore when credit is given to a community, it is every single individual that has worked who is actually credited. Moreover, and correct me if i'm wrong, but GNU was the first movement to credit every person involved with a software project in a public manner. Dispensing with the GPL? Definitely. Dispensing with the GNU project? Right now, other than the compiler, what else do you need to get a full BSD userland? My thesis is that Linux != GNU/Linux and there are other projects which deserve equal time in the OS name. If you truely feel that way and are passionate about freedom, you could start a movement to do the same telling people that ``Zero restriction freedom is true freedom and you could also perhaps call it GING(GING Is Not GNU) if you are not fond of G's, but love B's you could call it BING(BING Is Not GNU) which actually sounds quite neat :-) Regards, - vihan -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
On 12-Oct-06, at 9:14 AM, krishnakant Mane wrote: looks like cable fault - get all connections tightened and checked no, if it was a cable falt then it wont work on windows as well. my internet connection is right now working very well with windows. it was working with my gnu/linux setup too, but now it is not working. Rony had set the connection for me and the next day it stopped working. i have found that sometimes linux is less tolerant of faulty cabling than windoze - and in the old days less tolerant of faulty modems than in doze. -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves Associate, NRC-FOSS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/ -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] [OT] A case of ransom.
On Monday 09 October 2006 21:40, Rony wrote: . What I want to know is that can 5.4 users legally force $ally to provide reverse portability into older versions as they are still legal? No u cant. Read the licence. But they have regular discount melas at the ICFAI i hear. Just one query JTD, Does Tally 7.2 have an option to save data in/for older versions ? Regards, Ranjeet Walunj -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
On 12/10/06 11:38 +0530, Vihan Pandey wrote: To be very precise, there isn't a Free alternative to gcc yet. If the GNU folks will continue with the whole GNU/Linux thing, I might just get bugged enough to write a BSD licensed compiler. Does that mean you would have absolutely no problem at all in exploitative corporates taking your hard work, (sometimes) turning it into crap and making a huge pile of cash on it ? No. I use enough BSD licensed software to know how the BSD community works. Given the popularity of web services, DRM and closed hardware (how many people here use nvidia's drivers?), I don't really the GPLv2 as giving a specific advantage to end users. The one way to get around the requirements for distributing source is not to distribute it at all, but only provide public APIs (or protocols) to allow access to your code. Talking about freedom and practicing it is not just a momentary thing but has to be a continuous and perpetual struggle. If we leave the option for people to take what they want and commercialise it, they will never bother about freedom and the cause is diminished. Please note that I have no issues with commercialising code. Nor does the FSF. Both of us have issues with closing source for the second level of users. The _sole_ reason I would be using the BSD license would be to keep the GNU zealots away. snip Hmm... is it not so that in all GNU projects painstaiking efforts are made to credit every single person who contributed to any project. In fact in the And should I not then give equal credit to every project which has contributed to my Linux system? GNU C manual itself they are about 20 odd pages in the pdf crediting every person individually with the work they did. This includes BSD guys who did the BSD ports. This happens irrespective of what the personal beliefs are(i don't recall seeing a tag near anyone's name stating with GNU or without GNU :-) ) Therefore when credit is given to a community, it is every single individual that has worked who is actually credited. Moreover, and correct me if i'm wrong, but GNU was the first movement to credit every person involved with a software project in a public manner. Saying GNU/Linux deprives the other communities of that credit. Devdas Bhagat -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
2006/10/10, Mrugesh Karnik [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tuesday 10 October 2006 16:19, Nagarjuna G. wrote: Tell me something. Some people who are 'fans' of GNU, go to such lengths as to call all the software that's been licensed under the GPL, GNU software. Now if I write some software and use GPL for it, I'd most certainly not be willing to accredit it to GNU. Why should I? Like Linux said, Authors matter. By using the term GNU/Linux, it seems as though Linux is just a part of the GNU project. It is not. Linux is not part of GNU project, that is why it is not GNU Linux (softwared from GNU project has names like that GNU Emacs, GNU grub, GNU compiler collection... ) GNU/Linux (pronounced GNU slash Linux) means GNU+Linux. Just because someone uses your tools to build their own software does not mean that you own that software. Linux developed a kernel and GNU project build tools around that is a wrong idea. If you had done some reasearch about the rigin you would have realised it. GNU project was started to build a complete Free Operating system and they started replacing parts of unix and they reached a point when they replaced most parts for a Unix like system except for the kernel. At that time Linux was not released and there were no kernels available as Free Software (the original BSD license was not Free Software) so they started building their own kernel replacement called Hurd. But when Linus Torva;ds released his kernel under GPL v2 it filled that gap and we didn't have to wait for Hurd to finish to have a complete Unix like system. So instead of adopting Linux as GNU's official kernel (since it tries to be upto Unix while hurd tries to improve upon Unix ideas) Linux was combined with the rest of the GNU system to make a comple Unix like Operating System and it is called GNU-slash-Linux clearly meaning GNU+Linux (as opposed to GNU Linux would mean GNU's version of Linux). GNU project gave creadit to linux as without it we would not have the complete system and it is an important contribution. Linus torvalds didn't write the system to have a complete Free Operating system, but it was started as a college project. The motivation is different that freedom. So when you remove GNU from picture the history is twisted. The reason why the Free Software movement was started not because programming was fun but because we respect users Freedom and there was no Free operating systems available, so we wrote one. -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] How to do a minimal install?
/Call from a student/ I'm following this group since quite a long time, and I've got many new things to learn from it even without asking. Thanks for it guys. Now I have a quite simple question. I want to install a light version of Linux. I want to just write C programs in it and run them. It could do without the GUI. I've heard that Linux can be installed by getting the kernel, libraries and tools of our choice separately and then compiled to form a complete OS. How can it be done? Read HowTo Linux from scratch Best Regards, Mukund Deshmukh. Beta Computronics Pvt Ltd 10/1, IT Park, Parsodi, Nagpur-440022, INDIA. Cell +919422113746 -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
On 10/12/06, Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12-Oct-06, at 10:22 AM, Faraz Shahbazker wrote: the other. Unfortunately, one side is desperately trying to reach an amicable inclusive settlement (atleast as far as this list is concerned), while the other refuses to budge or even recognize that there is a problem :-( which is which? Lol - it is clear from the context which someone seems to have forgetfully removed!! Infact this is clearly indicative of the entire debate: people forgetting the context which enabled the creation of a system that they so proudly use and promote. .farazs -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
[ILUG-BOM] [Commercial] Linux Device Driver 15 Oct, RTLinux 4 Nov
Hi All, We are going to commence our next batch as follows: Linux Device Driver: 15 Oct RTLinux : 4 Nov Rgds, Hemendra Jain (S N Embedded) 98205 65918 -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
On 10/11/06, Devdas Bhagat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/10/06 20:35 +0530, Faraz Shahbazker wrote: snip toward GNU then it is only fair that you should NOT use any GNU tools to bootstrap your project. Best of luck!!! :-P As RMS put it, it was necessary to use closed source tools to write emacs initially. Touche :-) A pure GNU/Linux system wouldn't be very useful, unless I was to write a lot of software myself. By definition that is exactly what forms an Operating System . The rest are applications. Once again the boundaries may be blurred for YOU becoz the distro packages everything together. eg. say I don't need X or apache / (never use KDE anyway) / and I am prepared to use w3(GNU) instead of Firefox. Now with a few small applications which may [not] not fall under any particular large project, I still have a usable system. Try recreating the above scenario without glibc/binutils/coreutils (or any replacement thereof) and see what you get. Note that I've not even mentioned gcc since a user may not want to do any programming at all. Linux == kernel, GNU == indispensible(but kernel-less) project [excuse HURD] Pssst. gcc is about the only indispensible component. All the rest are dispensible. You are wrongly equating dispensible with replacable. We are not saying that you cannot replace GNU, but that without GNU or any equivalent replacement there would be no system to use inspite of all other large contributors. And now, since you are using GNU and not some equivalent replacement you should acknowledge as much. And no one would deny them the credit for initiating the Free Software movement. But on my system, there is _no_ first among equals. There is root, and then there are the mortals. There is the kernel, and then there is the userland. If by root you mean Operating System, then see the difference between a kernel and what constitutes an Operating System. It would have been different if Linus had handed over copyright to the FSF, or if the involvement of the FSF had been more. Once again, were not claiming kernel ownership, so we need not have been involved in kernel development. Moot point . farazs -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 10:22 +0530, Faraz Shahbazker wrote: On 10/12/06, Roshan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps, we have exercised our ``freedom of speech'', to the best of our abilities. There have been only arguments and no consensus on why 'GNU/Linux' or 'Linux'. Let us give a new name based on Union in Set Theory in mathematics acceptable to both, GliNUx, *ONLY FOR THIS Mailing list* ;-) Isn't that what we've been trying to say all along - in some form or the other. Unfortunately, one side is desperately trying to reach an amicable inclusive settlement (atleast as far as this list is concerned), while the other refuses to budge or even recognize that there is a problem :-( . farazs You know, after reading that entire thread, I can't help but think of - We are the Borg. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. - which until recently was used when referring to another OS. Why not be really freedom loving and let each one call it what as it pleases them or haven't you heard that a rose by any other name has just as many thorns? -gabin -- this too shall pass. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
[ILUG-BOM] Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
No. I use enough BSD licensed software to know how the BSD community works. Given the popularity of web services, DRM and closed hardware (how many people here use nvidia's drivers?), I don't really the GPLv2 as giving a specific advantage to end users. The one way to get around the requirements for distributing source is not to distribute it at all, but only provide public APIs (or protocols) to allow access to your code. We NEED to distribute source, just giving away API's sets a bad precedence for the project. If its an issue of source distribution, have you looked at Affero GPL ? Please note that I have no issues with commercialising code. Nor does the FSF. Both of us have issues with closing source for the second level of users. The _sole_ reason I would be using the BSD license would be to keep the GNU zealots away. That's not really the right way to go. You have every right to criticize anyone but releasing software under BSD style license(for freedom) just because you disagree with/dislike GNU and what it stands for set's a bad precedent. Moreover you can say what you want, but history is not going to change because of that. We owe FSF/GNU for starting this value system, lets not forget that. For whenever man forgets freedom or descends into callousness, the end result is a tyrannical society which in the end ends up destroying itself, only to go back to the value system. And should I not then give equal credit to every project which has contributed to my Linux system? Does that justify calling it Linux alone ? If you are are truely advocating giving credit to everyone call it GNU/Linux/Apache/_all_other_stuff_you_may_be_using When your BSD style licensed copiler does get finished and you are NOT AT ALL using ANY GNU tools nor follow the GNU philosophy. Please call your system whatever you want. Untill then you cannot simply dismiss GNU. Saying GNU/Linux deprives the other communities of that credit. Does that justify calling it Linux alone ? If you are are truely advocating giving credit to everyone call it GNU/Linux/Apache/_all_other_stuff_you_may_be_using deja vu . . . Regards, - vihan -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
On 12/10/06 13:47 +0530, Faraz Shahbazker wrote: On 10/11/06, Devdas Bhagat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/10/06 20:35 +0530, Faraz Shahbazker wrote: snip toward GNU then it is only fair that you should NOT use any GNU tools to bootstrap your project. Best of luck!!! :-P As RMS put it, it was necessary to use closed source tools to write emacs initially. Touche :-) A pure GNU/Linux system wouldn't be very useful, unless I was to write a lot of software myself. By definition that is exactly what forms an Operating System . The rest are applications. Once again the boundaries may be blurred for YOU becoz the distro packages everything together. Errr, gcc is just another application. What part of userland and kernelspace distinction do you refuse to understand? eg. say I don't need X or apache / (never use KDE anyway) / and I am prepared to use w3(GNU) instead of Firefox. Now with a few small applications which may [not] not fall under any particular large project, I still have a usable system. It may work for you, it doesn't work for me. Try recreating the above scenario without glibc/binutils/coreutils (or any replacement thereof) and see what you get. Note that I've not even Uhm, BSD? confused mentioned gcc since a user may not want to do any programming at all. Linux == kernel, GNU == indispensible(but kernel-less) project [excuse HURD] Pssst. gcc is about the only indispensible component. All the rest are dispensible. You are wrongly equating dispensible with replacable. We are not saying that you cannot replace GNU, but that without GNU or any equivalent replacement there would be no system to use inspite of all other large contributors. And now, since you are using GNU and not some equivalent replacement you should acknowledge as much. Fine, Mozilla/Apache/OpenOffice.org/Trolltech/KDE/WindowMaker/BSD/PostgreSQL/GNU/Linux. And no one would deny them the credit for initiating the Free Software movement. But on my system, there is _no_ first among equals. There is root, and then there are the mortals. There is the kernel, and then there is the userland. If by root you mean Operating System, then see the difference between a kernel and what constitutes an Operating System. root is UID 0. Define Operating system. By Microsoft's definition, a browser and media player are essential parts of an operating system. Devdas Bhagat -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] [OT] Chipset and Original Motherboard
On Wednesday 11 October 2006 21:59, Rony wrote: Roshan wrote: To be slightly on topic, have Linux distro users on this list, used motherboads manufactured by HIS, VIA,etc. (Not many have replied to Mr. Rony's question of compatible motherboard) Except for Devdas who is not a follower of GNU, rubbish i did mail. Thats why I had asked that question and I ask again How many freedom fighters on this list actually own commercial software companies Wrong question. and how many of these software companies are making non-customized software that can be used by everyone *and* , are the source codes of these non-customized softwares available to everyone on the internet under the gpl? we make customised software as part of a package involving hardware, software and the customers legacy app. All of it runs on GNU/linux. The customisation is trivial most of the time (php frontends, start stop scripts, logos etc.). What is not so trivial and invariably un usable by others are the tables and database logic, so far written from scratch, loaded on the customers drive and handed over on cd and promptly forgotten. -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] How to do a minimal install?
2006/10/11, Aniket Suryavasnshi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I've heard that Linux can be installed by getting the kernel, libraries and tools of our choice separately and then compiled to form a complete OS. How can it be done? Use Gentoo. http://www.gentoo.org/ If you want even a tougher path see Debian from scratch http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/01/10/1727246 Cheers Praveen -- Value your freedom, or you will lose it, teaches history. `Don't bother us with politics', respond those who don't want to learn. -- Richard Stallman Me scribbles at http://www.pravi.co.nr -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
On Thursday 12 October 2006 03:18, Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray wrote: This is just your assumption, who is asking any one to credit GNU for a non GNU project? The system is indeed GNU system with Linux as a kernel. When the kernel was completed, the only thing you need is to add is the GNU system to make it an OS. And the kernel was also completed using GNU tools. Under such a situation, why do you think we are asking for a thing that we didn't deserve? Hehehe. Thank you. Exactly what I needed to hear from an FSF representative. Now would you be so kind as to make sure everyone who tries to spread GNU philosophy is clear upon this point? What do you mean? I think you never needed to hear anything from any FSF representative. You need to tender an apology. Pray do not start throwing mud around, and then do a 'hehehe'. Get me one GNU hacker who said Linux is owned by GNU. No. No apology in this case. I am not simply throwing mud. It is a fact. Hence what I said above.. please make sure that all the GNU fans are clear upon this matter. I was having this argument during RMS' recent lecture. No apology. I apologise when I think I must. Look at the list archives for proof of that. Btw. I never said GNU `hacker'. I said GNU `fans'. -- Mrugesh Karnik GPG Key 0xBA6F1DA8 Public key on http://wwwkeys.pgp.net pgp5kGencP0M2.pgp Description: PGP signature -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] How to do a minimal install?
On Thursday 12 October 2006 12:30, Mukund Deshmukh wrote: Read HowTo Linux from scratch Well, with LFS, isn't there the dependency hell to be resolved manually?. Gentoo's portage is awesome. -- Mrugesh Karnik GPG Key 0xBA6F1DA8 Public key on http://wwwkeys.pgp.net pgpcGcaV6jCwo.pgp Description: PGP signature -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] How to do a minimal install?
On Thursday 12 October 2006 17:25, പ്രവീണ്|Praveen wrote: 2006/10/11, Aniket Suryavasnshi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I've heard that Linux can be installed by getting the kernel, libraries and Use Gentoo. http://www.gentoo.org/ If you want even a tougher path see Debian from scratch http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/01/10/1727246 Or an easier path with debian base-install. -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] [OT] A case of ransom.
On Thursday 12 October 2006 11:56, ranjeet walunj wrote: No u cant. Read the licence. But they have regular discount melas at the ICFAI i hear. Just one query JTD, Does Tally 7.2 have an option to save data in/for older versions ? not a clue. -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] browser incompatibility: MTNL Trust line
--- Abhishek Daga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had to look up the mtnl trustline site for getting digital signatures. http://www.mtnltrustline.com/keygencheck.htm It does not work with firefox. Not just mtnltrustline but MCA site does not work with firefox as well. So basically you need to: 1) Buy Windows XP 2) Use IE 6+ (with ActiveX enabled) An email pop3 client is required for using these signatures. They have explcitly mentioned OE. Does anyone know if they work with thunderbird or evolution? It works with Adobe reader v 7 on Linux though. And certificate is in standard format. So it should work with thunderbird. But wont be of much use as MTNL is NOT world recognised CA. MCA site is also insecure (uses http instead of https). Cookie is just simple JSESSIONID. Once your friendly neighbour sniffs it he gets access to your account. And guess what, this site is developed by TCS, leading software company of India. Totally not upto the mark or professional in my opinion. They have made it fully OS and browser dependent and unlikely that they would be interested in making it an independent one. Amish. -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
[ILUG-BOM] Re: challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
hello all. tried all means to get my internet connection on. but I am not getting connected to internet. jtd suggested to change the configuration in the /etc/ppp/options. now please tell me how to get the connection up. by the way how to turn of iptables from the root prompt? jtd was suggesting some thing similar. Krishnakant. -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
On Wednesday 11 October 2006 19:27, krishnakant Mane wrote: never the less my eth 1 has internet cable connected and I had used ./go command to configure pppoe for the same lan card. I had configured it to come up on demand and had not specified the time for which the link should stay up. is that the problem? if that is the case, how do I answer the question asked by ./go command for should the connection come up on demand? or some thing similar? What ISP do you use? How is the connection configured in Windoze? Do you need to use any dialers? Please give details. -- Dinesh A. Joshi -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
[ILUG-BOM] Need help in configuring and building kernel 2.6.16.18
On 10/12/06, Shakthi Kannan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, --- Mohan Nayaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please do not use /root. Why not? Because /root is typically the home directory of root. Please correct me if i am wrong, but i think if the driver kernel sources are kept in some directory owned by user, root access is required only for inserting removing the module. It doesn't matter where you keep the kernel sources. The driver Makefile has to have the kernel sources path set accordingly. The use of /usr/src is just to keep it under one directory so one doesn't need to keep searching for different kernel sources in the system. true i keep it in ~/linux-x.y.z --- The Xirtna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: what does it means to have a configured and built kernel? 1. To have the kernel sources installed. 2. To have MODULE load/unload support in the kernel (usually enabld by default). 3. To have the kernel installed and running on the system. Please help I am totally new to device drivers! Try my simple Linux device driver examples: http://www.shakthimaan.com/downloads.html SK -- Shakthi Kannan http://www.shakthimaan.com -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers -- The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne, the' assay so hard, so sharp the conqueryinge -- Geoffrey Chaucer -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
On Thursday 12 October 2006 17:19, krishnakant Mane wrote: yes indeed I need to use a dialer. my interface is RS PPPOE and access concentrater is sainet1234. I have to use a dialer that is on the desktop to connect. is it a default PPPoE dialer? or is it something that those guys have supplied? Have they installed any kind of drivers / softwares on your PC ( Windoze )? -- Dinesh A. Joshi -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
[ILUG-BOM] Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
On 11/10/06, Nagarjuna G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: GNU is an operating system, and that is why the prooject talks of everything:kernel+userland+toolchain+desktop etc., GNU project is a comprehensive project. The kernel is still taking the first steps, falling now and then, the toddler way. This project did not start now, but in 1984.Why do you say it is JUST a tool chain, when you know that without it no free software can be made, maintained and distributed free. If you use 'JUST a x' to a dispensable thing, you may be right. Prove that it is dispensable. Kernel is indispensable, so we embrace all free kernels. and so we give due respect to linux by calling an operating system gnu/linux. because it can work with another kernel but since we like to give due credit to the great efords of linus, we call gnu OS as gnu/linux. the very fact that being an operating system we make reference to the kernel as a credit must be appreciated. and don't forget linux is compiled with gnu c compiler or gcc for short. and what is make? Well then GNU is indeed dependent on Linux, just as the latter is dependent on it. Lets call a chair a chair and a table a table. that is why I called it symbiosis. we are not those who excluded it, the others did so. So tell them dependable core things cannot be excluded. indeed that's the way it should be. gnu/linux or linux/gnu, it is one and the same till you realise that kernel is made for an operating system, operating system is not made for a kernel. therefore gnu/linux. Then why does GPL te (Forgive me if I have touched on a painful nerve) There are numerous commercial software vendors who use GNU software in their commercial stuff. For instance HP- UX. All of us who have used it know the extent to which GNU is a part of HP-UX. It suits HP's model. They are a hardware vendor, and make money from hardware more than they do from software. However, think of a small time developer. An individual who has his aspiations, dreams, wishes, and a word in his heart which reads like freedom. If he were to develop a very niche piece of software, he would be forced to make public his source code because he cannot use commercial tool-chain, and is therefore left with GNU, which implies his code falls under the GPL license. Now whose freedom are we talking about??? I am not clear. If he is the original author of the program, then he is free to decide. Please read http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html and one more point, how many people using the software in this case are going to be programmers or even software venders? how many can even customise it them selves even though they are programmers? and who says you can't charge for the copies? if some one else puts it on the web as is, it is nothing but a advertise of that software for free. just think, if software is closed source and is pyrated, will the customer have any rights to claim support from you? but when the software is open sourced, your support of customisations apply to each and every user. if you want to call free software business a service based, then so be it. but here the scope of you as a software developer giving service and earning is more, because there is no un official customer using non supported pyrated software. it!! Still not. Come on get down to producing some real work now. Probably instead of keying in useless comments and counter comments, concentrate on keying in at least a few lines of code. You will certainly be helping FSF a lot more that way. And indeed if you also do something for the 95% (which many of you involved in Indic localisation are actually doing), then trust me you will also have done a lot of good towards Freedom. You are right, that is why I contribute to Indic-computing, as well as to another GNU project (GNOWSYS). Other projects that I contribute to are gnowledge.org, gnoware.org, the Indic fonts (Gargi, Samyak) and supervising several others. There are others in this list too who are active contributors. oh, one of the active contributers is right now writing reply to this thread. sorry to be a bit personal. but first of all don't just asumingly point fingers at just about any one whom you don't really know. and talking about getting down to keying in some lines of code. I have seen the work of Dr. Nagarjuna and know him personally. he not only contributes in developing great free software but also contributes socially to fsf by pointing people to the right software for the right task. I personally had this experience. while talking about contributing to gnosys, he may have perhaps remembered me *smile*. so please have a detailed study of a persons work before saying get down to coding etc. True, working is more fun. very true sir. regards. Krishnakant. -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] [OT] Chipset and Original Motherboard
Aseem Rane wrote: On 10/11/06, Rony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Except for Devdas who is not a follower of GNU, no other supporter of 'freedom' , 'open source', 'gnu' and 'gpl' gave any details of the motherboards they used for their clients. When it comes to some else's fruits of labour, its freedom and open source but when it comes to opening the source code of their own fruits of labour, they clam up. Then you get a lot of advice but not the actual information you are looking for. I strongly object to the above para Rony. Me and many others have given you our hardware info running Linux. I do not have any clients and probably for others it is the same. So we offered you all the info available with us without holding back anything. Nothing personal. Read my original request for mobos. It was a request to those who *had* clients and regularly installed linux workstations for them. If you do not fall in that category, why feel upset. I had already thanked everyone for giving information on self-owned mobos. You might be looking for very specific information from other business owners. But then do not blame all the supporter of 'freedom' , 'open source', 'gnu' and 'gpl' I expect an apology from you. Again it does not apply to you. It is those business owners who withheld information about their trade secrets on hardware they use for clients and then supporting freedom of information on others' labour of writing code ( foss vs closed) . I am not against holding back information that someone has painstaking collected over the years through hard work. But then they should give this freedom to others too. I was surprised that none of the total freedom supporters reprimanded the fanatic who tried to take away this freedom from his ideological opponent. Only one person stood up. Freedom is a 2 way process. Thats why I had asked that question and I ask again How many freedom fighters on this list actually own commercial software companies and how many of these software companies are making non-customized software that can be used by everyone *and* , are the source codes of these non-customized softwares available to everyone on the internet under the gpl? There are millions out there who think closed source is the only successful business model. How many of them actually own commercial software companies?? I don't understand the point you are making. How about starting your own software company and writing a closed source Auto-CAD software which would be a successful market leader. Sirf khayaali khichdi pakaana chhod do Rony. Khayali or not, if I make a CAD software, I will not open its source code. The bottom line as jtd pointed out in other thread is, being successful in business takes more than just opening or closing your code. I personally feel that FOSS or GNU or GPL whatever you call it, will not survive in the retail sector. Thats why from the responses to my question it is clear that hardly anyone on this list is doing a roaring business in foss retail software. Customizing GPled software is one of the very successful business strategies but in retail, one cannot survive by letting others know your code. GNU/FOSS/GPL is a social service to the user community. Thats why most FOSS softwares are called 'projects' not commercial ventures. Even their websites have .org as their url. In retail software I feel there are only 2 ways to sell it. One through closed source and make money on the copies sold or *Institutional* commercial grade support to the programmers who take pains ( not voluntary work ) to write the FOSS code and let it be open for everyone. That way they make good money writing the code and the people benefit from free as in beer or low cost software. The pros. will give customized versions to corporates and make good money on support. The copy cats will loose out because the software is already available for free/low cost in its best form. My question was meant to be incisive. If it has hurt anybodys' feelings then my apologies to them all. The whole issue is about giving the foss retail programmer his commercial due for writing the retail foss code that benefits all of us. It started with a comment on how a foss creator will make money. Regards, Rony. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
krishnakant Mane wrote: I had configured it to come up on demand and had not specified the time for which the link should stay up. is that the problem? if that is the case, how do I answer the question asked by ./go command for should the connection come up on demand? or some thing similar? Krish, the problem you face and my client faced earlier was of the access concentrator itself was not detected or responding. Then the connection times out. Regards, Rony. ___ All new Yahoo! Mail The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use. - PC Magazine http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
On Thursday 12 October 2006 18:30, Rony wrote: On M$ it uses the simple raspppoe package. In linux we used rp-pppoe. The penguin roared for one night after that it could take no more. :D Have they changed something on the server side? -- Dinesh A. Joshi -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
Dinesh Joshi wrote: On Thursday 12 October 2006 18:30, Rony wrote: On M$ it uses the simple raspppoe package. In linux we used rp-pppoe. The penguin roared for one night after that it could take no more. :D Have they changed something on the server side? No idea but my client's overhead switch was only replaced as claimed by the cable guy. However they changed over from static ip to dhcp without actually having a dhcp service running. Same setup at Krish's place too. I found this link given below, on google. Krish should also try to disable his firewall too as suggested by someone else on the net. iptables -F will flush the tables. http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions//showthread.php?t=482438 Regards, Rony. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
On Friday 13 October 2006 00:00, Rony wrote: On M$ it uses the simple raspppoe package. In linux we used rp-pppoe. The penguin roared for one night after that it could take no more. :D See if you can use the pppoe kernel module. -- Mrugesh Karnik GPG Key 0xBA6F1DA8 Public key on http://wwwkeys.pgp.net pgp5VoSLdFD74.pgp Description: PGP signature -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
[ILUG-BOM] Re: challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
hello, tried all possible options I will now just try iptables removal and see weather it works. can any one suggest me the way to remove iptable from my system till I desire. roni, I have also given a fake ip address to eth1 now and tried again, but same result. jtd tried to solve the problem over phone and still nothing seams to success. I get a number of . and then the connection times out. jtd rightly pointed out that my eth1 is not getting hold of the remote server. please refer to my first email on this thread to find the sample log I have posted after trying to connect. Krishnakant. -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] browser incompatibility: MTNL Trust line
On 12-Oct-06, at 9:44 PM, Amish Mehta wrote: And guess what, this site is developed by TCS, leading software company of India. big != leading. I seriously doubt what TCS produces can be called software -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves Associate, NRC-FOSS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/ -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] [OT] Chipset and Original Motherboard
On 10/12/06, Rony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nothing personal. Read my original request for mobos. It was a request to those who *had* clients and regularly installed linux workstations for them. If you do not fall in that category, why feel upset. Go read your *original* request. It does not asks inputs only from those who *had* clients and regularly installed linux workstations for them. So I guess I am justified in feeling upset. I had already thanked everyone for giving information on self-owned mobos. I would highly appreciate if you can guide me to this mail thanking everyone. I expect an apology from you. Again it does not apply to you. I feel it does apply to me and still expect an apology from you. I personally feel that FOSS or GNU or GPL whatever you call it, will not survive in the retail sector. FOSS not only survives but is in top few slots in many categories. Probably you mean FOSS cannot make obscene money in retail sector. I hope you see the difference. The whole issue is about giving the foss retail programmer his commercial due for writing the retail foss code that benefits all of us. It started with a comment on how a foss creator will make money. If you are good enough to write a CAD software on your own, I am sure many companies will hire you to write FOSS software. I am yet to come across a good FOSS programmer who is commercially not successful. But on second thought probably you are right. Making obscene money is not the sole primary motive for many Free Software developers. It is all about building a better society as I understand it. Be careful, people supporting Open Source might not have this view. So if you are motivated only by money and do not know how to do it with FOSS then asking around how to do it will be of little help. PS: Don't forget to read your original request and do show me the thanking mail -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] [OT] Chipset and Original Motherboard
Aseem Rane wrote: On 10/12/06, Rony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nothing personal. Read my original request for mobos. It was a request to those who *had* clients and regularly installed linux workstations for them. If you do not fall in that category, why feel upset. Go read your *original* request. It does not asks inputs only from those who *had* clients and regularly installed linux workstations for them. So I guess I am justified in feeling upset. I have later clarified in the next posts on the same threadMy query was not related to an install how-to but to know what hardware is being used by the experts for their business. While everyone is giving details of their own hardware, what I would like to know is the motherboards used for customers' workstations. The reason is that for self owned hardware, a lot of time is available to experiment and it is purchased only once. There are many big players on this list, who install 50, 100 or more systems at a stretch in big companies and the hardware used will have to be one that requires minimum setup time. It is this hardware detail that I am looking for, from the last six months. I would highly appreciate if the big players can provide these details, at least for 5 latest mobos used for their clients. I had already thanked everyone for giving information on self-owned mobos. I would highly appreciate if you can guide me to this mail thanking everyone. All your inputs are most welcome. What I am observing is that linux experts/gurus are not parting with information of the hardware they use. Its is as if its top secret. I wonder why. I feel it does apply to me and still expect an apology from you. How does this statement involve you to upset you? Except for Devdas who is not a follower of GNU, no other supporter of 'freedom' , 'open source', 'gnu' and 'gpl' gave any details of the motherboards they used for their clients. You don't have clients so stop getting fanatic. Thats the problem with GNU guys and I make this assumption after reading the entire thread. I personally feel that FOSS or GNU or GPL whatever you call it, will not survive in the retail sector. FOSS not only survives but is in top few slots in many categories. Like? ( In retail sales volume please ). Probably you mean FOSS cannot make obscene money in retail sector. I hope you see the difference. What is obscene money? The whole issue is about giving the foss retail programmer his commercial due for writing the retail foss code that benefits all of us. It started with a comment on how a foss creator will make money. If you are good enough to write a CAD software on your own, I am sure many companies will hire you to write FOSS software. I am yet to come across a good FOSS programmer who is commercially not successful. In the retail software segment? Having his own company? I already asked the question to this list and I got the information I wanted. But on second thought probably you are right. Making obscene money is not the sole primary motive for many Free Software developers. It is all about building a better society as I understand it. Be careful, people supporting Open Source might not have this view. So if you are motivated only by money and do not know how to do it with FOSS then asking around how to do it will be of little help. Read my mail again. Regards, Rony. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: challenge configuring pppoe, can some one help with following error messages?
krishnakant Mane wrote: tried all possible options I will now just try iptables removal and see weather it works. can any one suggest me the way to remove iptable from my system till I desire. Atleast flush the table using sudo iptables -F roni, I have also given a fake ip address to eth1 now and tried again, but same result. jtd tried to solve the problem over phone and still nothing seams to success. I get a number of . and then the connection times out. jtd rightly pointed out that my eth1 is not getting hold of the remote server. Can you get some info on the server side software? Regards, Rony. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] browser incompatibility: MTNL Trust line
On 10/11/06, Abhishek Daga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had to look up the mtnl trustline site for getting digital signatures. http://www.mtnltrustline.com/keygencheck.htm It does not work with firefox. Notice that, if you do a view source on that page, they use VB Script and the MS crypt engine to do the work for them. Don't know why that is necessary for them to generate the certificate. - Navneet -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Re: [ILUG-BOM] [OT] Chipset and Original Motherboard
Sometime on Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 10:39:44AM +0530, Rony said: How does this statement involve you to upset you? Except for Devdas who is not a follower of GNU, no other supporter of 'freedom' , 'open source', 'gnu' and 'gpl' gave any details of the motherboards they used for their clients. You don't have clients so stop getting fanatic. Thats the problem with GNU guys and I make this assumption after reading the entire thread. I dont understand. Do you mean there are several people on this list who have hardware/amc business and are withholding the information about what motherboard they use for their clients? I know of only 3/4 such people(i think so) including you who do hardware stuff :-) And what does being a GNU guy have to do with posting motherboard model details on this list? Anurag -- __ __ gnu /noo/ n. Ox like antelope; (abbr.) /gnoo/ n. (recursive acronym) Gnu's Not Unix. -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
