On Monday 24 August 2009 10:11:54 am Walter Bender wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 3:48 AM, John Gilmore<g...@toad.com> wrote: > > Re: [Sugar-devel] RFH - Journal corruption reports fom 8.2.1 users in Uy > > > >> Remember that Ceibal XOs have root access locked-down. And I recently > >> found out that since the key-delegation stuff was implemented, we can't > >> request developer keys. Not from OLPC at least, and LATU is not > >> providing that service that I know... > > > > Could someone please clarify this? > > According to Ceilbal (24-08-09): > > "We have delivered developer keys in the past, and we will deliver them to > the owner of the machine upon request." > > Therefore, I do not think that there is a violation of the GPL.
I wrote to Ceibal asking for information and this is what they replied: "Hola Andrés, Debido al sistema de seguridad incorporado en la XO, el Plan Ceibal no brinda la clave de desarrollador. Esto se debe, a que una persona con acceso a la clave podría desactivar la seguridad de la máquina. Cualquier otra consulta, no dudes en volver a comunicarte." Translation: Hello Andrés, Because of the security system built into the XO, Plan Ceibal doesn't provide developer keys. This is because a person with access to the key could deactivate the security of the machine. Don't hesitate in contacting us for any other questions. > -walter > > > It sounds like Project Ceibal is explicitly violating the GNU General > > Public License on much or all of the software that it ships: > > > > * It provides binaries without source code, and without a written > > offer of source code. > > > > * It provides binaries in a physical form (laptop) which is > > protected against modification by the end-user, so that those > > users cannot replace the GPLv3-licensed software on the laptop > > with later versions. More than 20 packages shipped are GPLv3 > > licensed, as of 12 months ago, including the Coreutils (most > > shell commands), tar and cpio (used for software updates), and > > gettext (internationalization). GPLv3 requires that the relevant > > passwords or keys must be supplied to the end user -- including > > both the "developer key" and the root password. > > > > * Some programs are modified, but the modified versions are not > > marked to distinguish them from the original GPL-licensed > > programs. > > > > There are other less important violations as well (most are documented > > at bugs.laptop.org; search for "GPL"). > > > > I would be happy to learn that the children receiving these laptops > > have full access to source code, ability to upgrade their laptops > > at will, and can tell modified from unmodified software. Please let > > me know what is really happening in the schools of Uruguay. > > > > John Gilmore > > _______________________________________________ > > Devel mailing list > > Devel@lists.laptop.org > > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- -Andrés _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel