Hi,
comments embedded.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Luchezar Georgiev
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 5:50 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Executable compression
>
>
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:43:55 +0000 (GMT), Bart Oldeman wrote:
>
> > The FreeDOS kernel is released under the GPL and will remain so. Getting
> > the agreement of all copyright holders (Pat Villani, John Price, ror4,
> > James Tabor, Tom, Lucho, Martin,
Bart,
> > many others) to change it is an
> > impossible task.
>
> OK, I see. Many copyright holders...
Yes, and we still don't know who is ror4. Sometimes I wonder about him.
> > It all rolls down to someone who wants to squeeze one more K out of the
> > kernel.sys binary. So what, if the packer happens to be
> > incompatible then
> > it just is.
>
> That "someone" is me, Lucho ;-) Have you ever struggled to
> squeeze our every possible byte to put your program in a ROM?
> Then you'll understand me!
I understand you Lucho, but Bart is right: if it's not possible, then just
it isn't.
> > As I see it, Pat contributed the kernel to the FreeDOS community (not to
> > be underestimated, as I doubt this project would be anywhere
> without it);
>
> Of course!
Of course.
> > the license that he saw fit to do that was the GPL. With the GPL come
> > certain freedoms at a cost of certain restrictions. If some restriction
> > means not being able to compress it 1K further from 43K to 42K (and
> > redistribute the result) then SO BE IT. Write your own exepacker if you
> > don't like it!
>
> I'm just going to register my own aPack copy. Then I'll have the
> right to distribute the FreeDOS kernel packed with it. As there
> is NO stub source code (the stub is contructed individually for
> each executable), I proposed Joergen to release the aPack source
> code except the aPLib compression library (closed source, open
> object code), which wouldn't mean less sales for him at all, but
> I don't have his answer yet. Whatever he decides, I think that
> once I have the right to distribute aPacked executables, nobody
> could stop me from doing this, as nobody could stop ANYONE from
> compiling the kernel source with ANY supported compiler and
> packing it with ANY executable packer.
You can do whatever is in your right to do, that is what GPL allows you to
do.
> As to the GPL "protection", what if Microsoft steals your GPL'ed
> project? How could you sue them? With their ARMY of lawyers,
> they'll SMASH you! And they don't care about the public opinion.
> All they care about is MONEY, which they get mainly from
> corporations like them, not from users. So, please - meet the
> press, blame them - what effect could you achieve but NOISE? GPL
> gives a false sense of security. As long as monolopies like
> Microsoft exist, they're the MASTERS, like it or not!
I disagree, for two reasons:
1 - Tobacco imperialist lost the lawsuit issued by a little number of
normal people. So can do Microsoft.
2 - If free/open software starts ignoring license issues, then in the near
future this can be used against them, exactly by the same big companies
(like Microsoft, but it's not the only one).
Ciao
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
