Linux-Misc Digest #442, Volume #18 Sat, 2 Jan 99 19:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: Best Free Unix? (Dave Brown)
Re: help me choose license (steve mcadams)
Re: help me choose license (brian moore)
Re: Mounting a hard drive that "does not exist" (Eduardo Perez)
Linux and Web publishing (Protocol?) (Neil Cherry)
Realtek Card (Mark Robinson)
bash error message (Mike Detlefsen)
Re: help me choose license (steve mcadams)
Re: help me choose license (steve mcadams)
Re: Printer woes!! (Crispg)
Re: WP8 installation (Crispg)
Re: NOSPAM in addresses.. (Valentin Abramov)
Re: help me choose license (brian moore)
Re: egcs/g++ Hello world (Crispg)
Re: Best Free Unix? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Advice on building an AXP Linux system (Gerald Koh)
Re: What's FUD (JET)
Re: Best Free Unix? (Chris Mauritz)
Re: How do i configure named properly? (Bill Unruh)
Re: NE2000 PnP card problem (Crispg)
Re: help me choose license ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What's FUD (Equinox)
Re: help me choose license (Bill Unruh)
How do i configure named properly? (mist)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Brown)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2 Jan 99 22:46:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>Ilya wrote:
>> Which companies offer the entire pre-installed OS?
>
>Many. Two that come to mind are VA Research and Promox. The former
>supports Debian with bandwidth and servers, and I have had satisfactory
>service from the latter.
I've heard that Dell has preinstalled Linux on orders of multiple machines.
I just got through putting Slackware and RH on a laptop. Slackware installed
in about 15 minutes (but couldn't get X running yet). RH installed in about
3 hours (wouldn't recognize pcmcia, but X worked).
--
Dave Brown Austin, TX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: help me choose license
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 22:53:54 GMT
[Snipped for brevity, quoted material marked with ">"]
On Sat, 2 Jan 1999 18:43:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Cheap Bytes CD's are sold, so it could not go on them. All major Linux
>distributions are sold, so it could not go in any of them.
I'm sorry, I still am not getting this, and am starting to feel pretty
dumb. Why could the GPL version not go in any of them? Is there no
GPL code in any of these?
> See the Debian
>Free Software Guidelines at www.debian.org or the Open Source Definition at
>www.opensource.org for explanations and examples of free software licenses.
>I think you will want Open Source certification.
I'm not sure what "Open Source certification" would do for me. For
the GPL version, or the proprietary version?
>> At the moment the best I can think of is to make it very clear upfront
>> that "by contributing code to this project, you are assigning the
>> necessary rights to allow your contributions to be included in a
>> proprietary product" or suchlike.
>
>I see no problem with this. However, you must be very sure to get an
>explicit assignment from each contributor, and be as sure as you can that
>everyone who makes such an assignment has the right to do so. You don't to
>discover after selling some proprietary licenses that one of your
>contributors had previously assigned all rights to his code to his
>employer.
Ouch. Yes, good to be cautious about that aspect of things. -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: help me choose license
Date: 2 Jan 1999 22:56:12 GMT
On Sat, 2 Jan 1999 22:15:23 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> brian moore writes:
> > OTOH, with a GPL license (as opposed to 'you can not sell this'
> > licenses), its very difficult to make money selling the code: as soon as
> > PersonA starts making money, there's nothing to stop PersonB from selling
> > the same package at 10% less... or PersonC... etc.
>
> Steve is proposing a library, not an application. If he releases it under
> the GPL, applications that use it must also be under the GPL. Free
> software authors will of course be quite willing to GPL their programs, but
> companies that want to use his library in proprietary programs will have to
> purchase licenses from him.
Yes, which makes it very useful to him (over LGPL).
I was commenting on the part of his worry that people could sell his
code with GPL and his desire to muddle his licences it with a
'reselling' clause.
The trick to using the GPL in his case would be that it would let the
economy set the price down to slightly over the cost of distribution.
Others -could- resell his code, they just couldn't profit from it.
The rules would be dictated not my copyright law and lawyers, but simple
economics: if anyone can resell it, no one can profit from it.
(Much as Cheapbytes/LSL/etc resell Redhat CD's: nothing is stopping them
or others from doing it, and their prices are roughly the same and
only slightly above the cost of distribution. The -real- money is in
selling service, which is how Redhat is profitable despite $2 CD's.)
Free Software developers wouldn't fear incorporating GPL'd work into
their own GPL'd work, since it would be no change in the license.
The proprietary folks, though, would have to buy a license to keep their
work proprietary (or else the viral nature of the GPL would taint their
code). A lot of the BSD-license devotees complain about the viral
nature of the GPL, but it does have its uses, and is, IMHO, essential to
ensuring software remains free.
--
Brian Moore | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | a cockroach, except that the cockroach
Usenet Vandal | is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster
------------------------------
From: Eduardo Perez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mounting a hard drive that "does not exist"
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 15:02:40 +0100
SaintZero wrote:
>
> When I try to mount my vfat partition, hda1 It errors and I get "Special Device
> does not exist" I think I'm doing things correctly but I don't know Please Help
> me and please don't shoot the new kid in town...
Remember to use '/dev/hda1' instead of just 'hda1'; if '/dev/hda1' does
not exists, use the mknod command 'mknod /dev/hda1 3 1'.
I hope this helps.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cherry)
Subject: Linux and Web publishing (Protocol?)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 21:46:02 GMT
I would like to know if there is a program that can perform like the
publish portion of Netscape? I've used Netscape (composer) and
unfortunately it has this nasty habit of editing my links to cgi
references! I don't need an html edit (I do it mostly by hand so I can
get better result across many browsers) just the publisher (It uses
UDP).
--
Neil Cherry (Text only) http://members.home.net/ncherry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Graphics) http://meltingpot.fortunecity.com/lightsey/52
------------------------------
From: Mark Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Realtek Card
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 23:32:07 GMT
I have an ethernet card that is compatible with rtl8139 module. Is
there a way to configure it at installation? I have the io(is 0xec80
normal?) and irq
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Detlefsen)
Subject: bash error message
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 16:52:24 -0600
I'm getting an error message when I log into any account that goes:
bash: ecport: command not found
Now, I deduce that in some script I have misspelled 'export' as
'ecport'. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how to search for the
file? I've looked in all the ones I could find, but the little devils
are hiding all over the place in Linux. Grep doesn't seem to want to
work on a global scale. Is there anything that does?
Thanks.
Mike D.
--
Antispam header: Do not reply to this address!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: help me choose license
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 22:53:57 GMT
[Snipped for brevity, quoted material marked with ">"]
On 2 Jan 1999 20:45:24 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore) wrote:
>OTOH, with a GPL license (as opposed to 'you can not sell this'
>licenses),
Exactly what is the difference between a GPL license and a "you can
not sell this" license? It seems to me that both would allow anyone
to use the code in free products, neither would allow anyone besides
the author or the author's licensees to use the code in commercial
products. Am I missing it this far? -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: help me choose license
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 22:53:53 GMT
[Snipped for brevity, quoted material marked with ">"]
On 2 Jan 1999 18:05:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William Burrow)
wrote:
>You might like to look at the Qt license. Should be somewhere on:
>
>http://www.troll.no/
>
>As to what free software people think of such a license, investigate any
>KDE thread.
Have they published their new open-source license, or is that still
all a "future" thing? -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Crispg)
Subject: Re: Printer woes!!
Date: 2 Jan 1999 20:34:25 GMT
Check your printer documentation and see if its able to emulate any other more
common printer and then redo what you did before but for the emulated printer
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Crispg)
Subject: Re: WP8 installation
Date: 2 Jan 1999 20:39:32 GMT
I got my WP8 to work by just selecting the other check box, not with one asking
for a license key checkbox. It'll work fine for 90 days. I believe you have to
call or mail them a request for a license key, of course there will be a cost,
that at this time I don't recall the amount.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: NOSPAM in addresses..
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Valentin Abramov)
Date: 02 Jan 1999 20:39:17 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>
>My feeling is that when a question is asked in a news group, it should
>be answered in a news qroup. With DejaNews being available, it should
>not be an excuse, "I don't get to read this group often." Or
>whatever. Those people who do bother to follow the groups for
>answeres, or use DejaNews can then possible benifit from the answere
>without having to post the same or similar question again.
>
Imagine situation, where only thing (normally) working on your box is
E-mail and you find some way to send question to NG. With forged (by
yourself) addres you can't recesive anything, as you don't receive this
message by mail (I simply removed your addres without any thought about
reality of it, as I do always with forged addresses).
>So, what is the spam situation now? I have been fairly active in
>several news groups, and my trashcan is not receiving much spam. I
>don't think I've seen any for a few weeks. Could the ISPs be finaly
>cracking down?
>
>--
>David Steuber
>http://www.david-steuber.com
>s/trashcan/david/ to reply by mail
>
Nice address. Your solution simply moves all work (against spam) to
others, actually looks like You simply aren't able to defend your own
mailbox.
Valentin Abramov
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: help me choose license
Date: 2 Jan 1999 23:41:40 GMT
On Sat, 02 Jan 1999 22:53:57 GMT,
steve mcadams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Snipped for brevity, quoted material marked with ">"]
> On 2 Jan 1999 20:45:24 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore) wrote:
>
> >OTOH, with a GPL license (as opposed to 'you can not sell this'
> >licenses),
>
> Exactly what is the difference between a GPL license and a "you can
> not sell this" license? It seems to me that both would allow anyone
> to use the code in free products, neither would allow anyone besides
> the author or the author's licensees to use the code in commercial
> products. Am I missing it this far? -steve
You're missing it. :)
The GPL doesn't stop someone from selling it. You can take something
like the Linux kernel, which is GPL'd, stamp out a million CD's and sell
them. If you can get money for it, good.
The catch is that you can't stop someone else from buying one of those
CD's and duping them a million times and selling them for a buck less
than yours. He, in turn, can't stop someone from selling them for a
buck less than him. The end result is $2 CD's.
In short, there's no way to really profit by selling GPL'd code, because
anyone else can sell it, too, and there's not only nothing to stop them,
they're ENCOURAGED to do so.
The reason no one is unfairly profiting is because the rules of economics
work here, better than the rules of law. Economics is swift, law is
slow (and expensive).
If you add a 'you may not resell this work' clause, it will have little
effect, and enforcement would be an issue for lawyers instead of the
marketplace. Lawyers suck, and giving them money when the marketplace
is a much better mechanism is silly.
Actually, it may have a great effect, but only in getting nobody to use
the code. Look at the case of X. When the Open Group announced that
people selling X11 would have to pay for new versions, they tried a 'no
duplication for profit' clause. But that would hit even the $2 CD's,
which have a (very slim) profit. People screamed about it: XFree
announced they would no longer use source from the Open Group. The
leaders of the various BSD's and Linus all denounced the license change.
A few months went by, and the Open Group changed the license back: they
managed to alienate enough developers that no one was using the
enhancements they wanted to charge for.
The same thing goes on with KDE: Redhat doesn't include it because of
questions about whether what Redhat is doing comply with the license.
(Redhat does cost money: but what are you buying? Some may say the
software, in which case they would need to pay a license fee to
Trolltech. What about the CheapBytes CD? Are they selling software
and would they need to pay a license fee?)
All the legal issues around 'for sale' clauses get really ugly. The
GPL, on the other hand, is elegant in the way it moves things that are
complex legal issues into the marketplace, where enforcement is
automatic.
The beauty of the GPL in your case:
The GPL is a virus. It 'taints' code it touches. If they use your
library, their code is tainted. (This is the reason the LGPL exists: to
get around the tainting issue to get people to use things like Lesstif
or GTK even in commercial software.)
In your case, though, you don't want them using the free version of your
library in commercial code. So the tainting mechanism is actually GOOD
for you: if they use your code, they are required by the license to
GPL their code.
If they are selling software (as opposed to services), they will not
want to do that and will have to pay. If, otoh, they are selling
services (like Redhat does) and the software itself is free, then they
don't care: their code may vary well be under the GPL anyway, and the
use of your library would be fine.
--
Brian Moore | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | a cockroach, except that the cockroach
Usenet Vandal | is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Crispg)
Subject: Re: egcs/g++ Hello world
Date: 2 Jan 1999 20:47:43 GMT
Don't you have to do a
#include <iostreams.h>
instead of
#include <iostreams>
?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix?
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 20:23:20 GMT
Ilya wrote:
> Which companies offer the entire pre-installed OS?
Many. Two that come to mind are VA Research and Promox. The former
supports Debian with bandwidth and servers, and I have had satisfactory
service from the latter.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 13:49:52 -0700
From: Gerald Koh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.alpha,comp.os.linux.hardware,linux.redhat.axp
Subject: Advice on building an AXP Linux system
Hi folks,
I have just stumbled upon a Digital AXPpxi 33 motherboard. The OEM
design guide is dated October 1994. The chip is either a 166 Mhz 21066
or a 66 Mhz 21068. I can't pry off the heatsink to look. Anyway,
looking forward to the day when I have a persistent net connection, I
thought I build this thing up to use as a server for my internal net,
maybe also a QuakeWorld Server, Hotline Server, Personal Mail or Web
server, something like that.
My question is: Is it worth it? The OEM design guide is dated 1994. Is
this board too piss ass slow to be useful for anything? Maybe it could
serve some menial intranet purpose in my house.
The list of hardware in the design guide is quite out of date, I'm sure
I could pick up a case, 4 gig SCSI2 drive, and some cheap ass 64 bit
video card and have something that works. Any recomendations? I figure
I'll run Red Hat 5.2 on it.
If you wouldn't mind, reply both to the group and email. I never get
the time to read this group regularly enough for stuff to not expire on
me.
Thanks,
Gerry
--
Gerald Koh
Content Engineer
Agency.com and Eagle River Interactive
Phone: 970.845.2182
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ: 24619606
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 18:08:37 -0500
From: JET <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's FUD
"James A. Cleland" wrote:
> What's FUD?
Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
From: Chris Mauritz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix?
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 20:30:40 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Mike Lipsie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 1 Jan 1999 14:59:11 +0800, Ilya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Which companies offer the entire pre-installed OS? I want to get one
>>without any Microsoft products at all, ready to go, and later install
>>a different OS if I need to.
>
> Others have resonded to your other questions (and they are better qualified
> than I) but this question seems to have been misunderstood or overlooked.
> To my knowledge, none of the major PC manufacturers (such as Dell,
> Gateway, ...) sell a machine with one of the free Unix variants pre-installed.
> I think I read that Compaq might be planning a Linux machine but I do
> not remember clearly. You will have noticed that every response you
> got suggested that you do the installation.
I had a number of problems getting RH 5.1 and 5.2 to install on Compaq
rackmount Proliant machines. There seems to be no driver on the boot/supp
floppies for the integrated 10/100 ethernet card (which I believe is a
TI Thunderlan). Solaris 2.6 with the DU3 disks recognized all the funky
Compaq crap integrated into the motherboard (including the hacked
symbios SCSI controller and cirrus logic video).
I could only get linux to install on these machines by disabling the
integrated ethernet and installing a tulip-based ethernet card. The
scsi controller and ATAPI CD also don't seem to always be recognized
either. I didn't have any of these problems with Solaris.
These were Proliant 850R (dual PPro 200) and Proliant 1850R (dual
PII-450) machines.
Cheers,
Chris
--
Christopher Mauritz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: How do i configure named properly?
Date: 2 Jan 1999 23:55:11 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I have a really hard time understanding why you want to use named. Do
you really have a network of hundreds of machines you are trying to
control spread across a bunch of subdomains? Since you have an ISP, I
suspect you have a few machines, in which case named is painful overkill
(painful because you have to try to figure it out, as you ae having
trouble doing).
>I'm having trouble getting named to accept my configuration settings.
>ATM, it shows errors in var/log/warn like this
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Crispg)
Subject: Re: NE2000 PnP card problem
Date: 2 Jan 1999 20:56:31 GMT
try modprobe ne2000 io=0xXXX irq=X
or
read the HOW-TO on Ethernet, the most up-to-date. It usually goes over
different NICs and any similarities or differences.
and
read up on insmod,modprobe and rmmod and lsmod
also
Disable in your CMOS any setting for a PNP OS, this won't bother Win95.
and
finally don't enable ISAPNP in your /etc/rc.config
drop me a line if you get it to work
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: help me choose license
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 18:43:30 GMT
steve mcadams writes:
> 1. I would like the code to be free for use in free products, ie
> products that are not sold. So it could go into distribution X, be on
> the cheapbytes cdroms, etc.
Cheap Bytes CD's are sold, so it could not go on them. All major Linux
distributions are sold, so it could not go in any of them. See the Debian
Free Software Guidelines at www.debian.org or the Open Source Definition at
www.opensource.org for explanations and examples of free software licenses.
I think you will want Open Source certification.
> At the moment the best I can think of is to make it very clear upfront
> that "by contributing code to this project, you are assigning the
> necessary rights to allow your contributions to be included in a
> proprietary product" or suchlike.
I see no problem with this. However, you must be very sure to get an
explicit assignment from each contributor, and be as sure as you can that
everyone who makes such an assignment has the right to do so. You don't to
discover after selling some proprietary licenses that one of your
contributors had previously assigned all rights to his code to his
employer.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Equinox)
Subject: Re: What's FUD
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1999 21:57:02 GMT
On Sat, 02 Jan 1999 16:31:37 -0500, "James A. Cleland"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's FUD?
'Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.' A marketing tactic designed to make
people afraid to use Company A's product, for fear that it will fail.
Company B, of course, claims to offer a more reliable alternative.
--Equinox
==========================================================================
Email (spam-disabled):
lord *underscore* equinox *at* mindspring *dot* com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: help me choose license
Date: 2 Jan 1999 22:01:41 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams) writes:
]>By "non-commercial use" I assume that you mean something like "You may use
]>this for personal, non-commercial purposes. You may give away copies but
]>you may not sell them." This would mean that I could not, for example, use
]>a word processor based on your code to write a proposal, and that
Copyright law cannot control the use made of a product. A written
agreement can. A shrinkwrap license is not an agreement (takes two to
tango). It might control the copying that can be done, but not the use.
]>CheapBytes couldn't put it on one of their $2.00 CD's. It would get used
most definitions of "non-commercial" copying allow distribution as long
as the distribution fee is "nominal"-- ie reasonable to cover the costs
of distribution. But the copyright holder can define it any way he wants
to, from "may only be copied by monks who have taken a vow of perpetual
poverty" to " may be copied or sold by anyone as long as they charge
less than 10,000 dollars for it". It is entirely up to the copyright
holder.
]>by a few students, but hardly anyone would ever hear of it.
]1. I would like the code to be free for use in free products, ie
]products that are not sold. So it could go into distribution X, be on
]the cheapbytes cdroms, etc. Very close to, if not identical to, GPL
]code (though I'll have to closely review the GPL again to see if there
]are any sticking points that I've forgotten).
]2. I would like it to be available for use in commercial products via
]purchase of a proprietary license.
]It seems that it should be possible to do both, so that if someone
]develops an application that uses only this library and their own
]code, then decides to make it commercial, they could buy a
]proprietary license and go for it. If they use other free code such
]as GPL'ed code, they would lose this option, but not because of my
]code. There are applications out there that really are worth paying
]for and that are not outrageously priced, and I see no reason they
]should not benefit from my library and vice versa. Just like there
]are very good free products out there.
Fine. Make that statement, just as you have. GPL is only one approach.
LGPL is another. The Motzilla license another. (you might want to also
look at that one), etc. Decide what kind of copies you want to allow to
be made, and put them into your license. It is entirely up to you.
However, do not try to control more than the copying that the other
people do (like try to restrict their use of the software) as that will
likely get you into hot water with respect to the courts.
You could also go the route of demanding written agreements with all of
your purchasers. In that case, you can put whatever you wish into the
agreement, even that the software is only to be used on Thursdays when
the moon is full. Of course finding purchasers might be difficult, but
that is your problem.
]It would be great to have help at some point, but there are two
]problems with getting help. The first is (2 above) which affects the
]way contributions can be handled. The second is that a certain amount
]of code has to be written to (a) show the design of the thing so
]there's a framework that can be filled in and (b) prove that the thing
]works; at least on the Windows side, I am intending to use a pretty
]radical approach (I know it will work, but I don't know how many
]roadblocks uncle bill has put in the way). I really am unable to see
]how I could possibly avoid this except by spending time writing a
]design document that could be better spent by writing the code. I'm
]open to ideas...
Oh, yes. Open Software is not a free ride. You must do a lot of work
yourself first to make the product useful as it is. Otherwise nobody
will be interested in contributing. Remember that anyone elses
contributions will at best be less than 1% of the value of the final
product. Most of the rest you have to already have in place.
...
]At the moment the best I can think of is to make it very clear upfront
]that "by contributing code to this project, you are assigning the
]necessary rights to allow your contributions to be included in a
]proprietary product" or suchlike. Contributed code would go into both
]the free and proprietary products which would be identical except for
]what is done with the product and whether one pays for it. I am not
]sure what the potential open-source community contributors would think
]of such a thing; would they be offended that someone is in effect
]selling their code, or would they be glad to see their code included
]in a free product?
It depends on how useful they think the code is, and how much they would
have to contribute to make it useful. A 1% contribution would probably
be fine if it helped make the code more useful to them. A 30%
contribution would not be. They will primarily contribute because that
particular contribution makes the code more useful to them personally.
Read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" (author?) which outlines the Open
Software concept clearly and was the document which convinced Netscape
to make Mozilla open source.
------------------------------
From: mist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How do i configure named properly?
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 22:05:15 +0000
Reply-To: mist <{$mist$}@misthaven.demon.co.uk>
I'm having trouble getting named to accept my configuration settings.
ATM, it shows errors in var/log/warn like this
misthaven named[80]: zone "misthaven.demon.co.uk" (file misthaven): no
NS RRs found at zone top
misthaven named[80]: master zone "misthaven.demon.co.uk" rejected due to
errors
with the same sort of error for my 23.83.228.212.in-addr.arpa entry.
The named.conf is setup to forward queries to demon (my isp) if they
can't be resolved locally, but I'm not always connected.
The entry in named.conf that corresponds to the error above is
zone "misthaven.demon.co.uk" {
type master;
file "misthaven";
};
and the "misthaven" file looks like
@IN SOA misthaven. root.misthaven.demon.co.uk
(1999020102;
360000;
3600;
3600000;
360000);
IN NS localhost
1 IN PTR localhost.
Please help. I have no idea what an NS RR is, and how I should include
it at the "zone top", but I'd like to. Sadly the documentation I have
on this seems to focus on either older versions of Named, or on other
areas than the zone file formats.
--
Mist.
http://www.misthaven.demon.co.uk/prof/
Short FAQ on Demon and HTML.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Misc Digest
******************************
