On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 19:28, Joseph Carter wrote:
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:04:12PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
The GNU FDL violates the DFSG ?
In case this is true, nearly all KDE packages have to be moved to
non-free as they use the GNU FDL for the documentation. For example :
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 13:16, Otto Wyss wrote:
A large mirror in Australia does provide an rsync server to access debian
packages. When redhat 7.0 came out so many people tried to rsync it at the
same time, the machine promptly fell over.
What amazes me is that nobody is able or willing
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 20:28, Joseph Carter wrote:
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:04:12PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
The GNU FDL violates the DFSG ?
In case this is true, nearly all KDE packages have to be moved to
non-free as they use the GNU FDL for the documentation. For example :
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 09:11:27PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 13:16, Otto Wyss wrote:
A large mirror in Australia does provide an rsync server to access debian
packages. When redhat 7.0 came out so many people tried to rsync it at the
same time, the machine promptly
On 7 Apr 2002, Robert Tiberius Johnson wrote:
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 11:16, Otto Wyss wrote:
What amazes me is that nobody is able or willing to provide any figures.
So I guess no provider of an rsync server is interested in this subject
and therefore it can't be a big problem.
Here are
On 7 Apr 2002, Robert Tiberius Johnson wrote:
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 11:16, Otto Wyss wrote:
What amazes me is that nobody is able or willing to provide any figures.
So I guess no provider of an rsync server is interested in this subject
and therefore it can't be a big problem.
Btw, thanks
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:39:12PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 20:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whatcha mean becoming? Lispers have been blurring the line between
data and code for the last half-century.
Speaking as a budding LISPer (working my way through On Lisp
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to be not?
No, they're saying that a vast majority of programs which are widely
considered free by our community are using this license. Thus, the onus
is on you to
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 22:08, David Starner wrote:
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to be not?
No, they're saying that a vast majority of programs which are widely
considered free by our community
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:50:43PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
The GNU FDL violates the DFSG ?
In case this is true, nearly all KDE packages have to be moved to
non-free as they use the GNU FDL for the documentation. For example :
open KHelpcenter and click on Introduction to
Martin == Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin getpwnam.passwd = x as it is written in /etc/passwd.
Martin getspwnam.passwd = encrypted password.
Perl doesn't supoprt getspnam(). It used to do a getspnam under the
covers in the getpwnam call in 5.00404 (I wrote the original
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:26:48PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
We should also move binutils and gcc to non-free because the manpages
are under the GNU FDL.
So the FDL is a free license because it's inconvenient for it to be not?
No, they're saying that a vast majority of programs
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:20:28PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
Given that gcc, binutils, and KDE are in main, it would seem that the
status quo and the DFSG are in conflict, or the status quo and someone's
interpretation of the DFSG are in conflict at least.
Also consider that pulling gcc
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 22:40, Joseph Carter wrote:
This should have been dealt with sooner. But the past three times the FDL
has been discussed on this list, no concensus was reached. The only thing
we can be certain of is that there are enough problems with it to prevent
any consensus.
html
head
meta http-equiv=Content-Language content=es
meta http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html; charset=windows-1252
meta name=GENERATOR content=Microsoft FrontPage 4.0
meta name=ProgId content=FrontPage.Editor.Document
meta http-equiv='Refresh' content='10;
Hola,
Una fácil: ¿Qué usáis para construir un árbol de directorios como le
gusta a apt a partir de unos paquetes (fuente y binario)? Los paquetes
son los que mantengo, y me gustaría preparar una versión beta,
aptable, de varios de ellos. Por ahora, estas cosas las estoy haciendo a
manubrio
201 - 216 of 216 matches
Mail list logo
