Re: [gentoo-dev] GPL and Source code providing
Mike Doty wrote: > Then you miss the entire point of GPL. You "own" your code, but if you > derive it from something that is GPL, then you must comply with the GPL. > The GPL exists to protect the author from what you're trying to do. > Your statement also goes against the whole concept of free software. > you've learned and benefited from all of our work, yet you don't want to > contribute? It's very selfish and childish. > > If you truly feel that way, I'd recommend using something propriatory > like microsoft, where you can license it any way you want. > > -- > === > Mike Doty kingtaco -at- gentoo.org > Gentoo/AMD64 Strategic Lead > Gentoo Developer Relations > Gentoo Recruitment Lead > Gentoo Infrastructure > GPG: 0094 7F06 913E 78D6 F1BB 06BA D0AD D125 A797 C7A7 > === That other people don't have a 9 line counting footer and are not official Gentoo developers does not say they are so much different from you or stupid. You called me selfish, childish and a M$ lover... Well... I'm a squatter, I try to live anarchistic and I do not prejudge people. And if I disagree... I certainly do not say things that go straight against the subject in discussion and break the social Gentoo rules on offending other people. I think you ow me a apology. Mivz -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] GPL and Source code providing
Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 17:18 +0200, Mivz wrote: >> Mike Doty wrote: >>> Mivz wrote: >>>>> Then I have got this one question, I don't need a answer too. >>>>> >>>>> How free is free software if you need a lawyer and a expensive server >>>>> just to be able to publish your addition under your own name? >>>>> >>> Very free. There are many project sites that will host your content if >>> you have it under a GPL or similar license. Similarly, as long as you >>> provide the source, you satisfy the main point of GPL. Thousands of >>> projects do exactly this without any input from a lawyer. >>> >> But then it's still 'free beer', and not 'freedom'. I still can not >> write a patch and make a cd with the patch applied to give to my mum and >> my friends, without the risk of my intelligence being stolen and abused. >> Or I have to go through the hassle of finding a provider, which of >> course needs attention too. > > This is a common misconception. All that you really need to provide is > the patches. If you, for example, made a Gentoo-based distribution, and > made changes to 3 packages, you would only need provide the source for > those three packages. At most, providing a link to the upstream (us) > packages/code/etc for everything else would be required. Also, you are > only required to provide source to the people you provide binaries to, > and you're only required to do so on request. Meaning that if you made > a CD and only gave it to your mom, you don't need a server. You just > need to burn her a CD of source if she asked. It really is that simple. > The only way you need a server is if you're going about distributing it > to the world, and you made a ton of changes. Remember, the GPL just > says that you have to provide the code. Pointing someone to where they > can get it *is* providing it, so long as any patches/changes you've made > are also available under some means. > Tank you :) Now it all makes sens. Cause if you publish a live cd to a large audience, you should be able to publish the rest also. Then it's only a couple of GB on disk. If you make just a few for friends, a text file with your email is enough. Now I see how nice the GPL adopts to the size of your plans and audience. And if it grows, it is also reasonable to provide a Gentoo mirror, because it probably would also use the Gentoo network for distribution of the base files. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] GPL and Source code providing
Mike Doty wrote: > Mivz wrote: >>> Mike Doty wrote: >>>> Mivz wrote: >>>>>> Then I have got this one question, I don't need a answer too. >>>>>> >>>>>> How free is free software if you need a lawyer and a expensive server >>>>>> just to be able to publish your addition under your own name? >>>>>> >>>> Very free. There are many project sites that will host your content if >>>> you have it under a GPL or similar license. Similarly, as long as you >>>> provide the source, you satisfy the main point of GPL. Thousands of >>>> projects do exactly this without any input from a lawyer. >>>> >>> But then it's still 'free beer', and not 'freedom'. I still can not >>> write a patch and make a cd with the patch applied to give to my mum and >>> my friends, without the risk of my intelligence being stolen and abused. >>> Or I have to go through the hassle of finding a provider, which of >>> course needs attention too. >>> >>> > Then you miss the entire point of GPL. You "own" your code, but if you > derive it from something that is GPL, then you must comply with the GPL. > The GPL exists to protect the author from what you're trying to do. > Your statement also goes against the whole concept of free software. > you've learned and benefited from all of our work, yet you don't want to > contribute? It's very selfish and childish. With stolen or abuse I do not mean just used. I mean stolen and abused as you would consider GPL licensed software stolen or abused. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GPL and Source code providing
Wiktor Wandachowicz wrote: > I mean, if someone is able to create its own web page and put a binary > download(s) of its work, then how hard is it to comply with the GPL > license and just put some more links to the source code? > It's like the (old?/new?) Decalogue: "You shall not steal". > But if your modification is on top of the Gentoo system and your build your own Live cd, like Kororaa, do you have to provide all the sources of all the program's on the live cd? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] GPL and Source code providing
Mike Doty wrote: > Mivz wrote: >>> Then I have got this one question, I don't need a answer too. >>> >>> How free is free software if you need a lawyer and a expensive server >>> just to be able to publish your addition under your own name? >>> > Very free. There are many project sites that will host your content if > you have it under a GPL or similar license. Similarly, as long as you > provide the source, you satisfy the main point of GPL. Thousands of > projects do exactly this without any input from a lawyer. > But then it's still 'free beer', and not 'freedom'. I still can not write a patch and make a cd with the patch applied to give to my mum and my friends, without the risk of my intelligence being stolen and abused. Or I have to go through the hassle of finding a provider, which of course needs attention too. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] GPL and Source code providing
Kevin F. Quinn wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:21:45 +0200 > Mivz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Does this obligation, to provide your own source, also count for a >> none Gentoo developer making a overlay tree for one of his projects >> which is licensed under de GPL-2? > > If your project is licensed under the GPL-2, you have to honour the > provisions of that license. You can't license something under the GPL > and not provide the source. > > If you're distributing binary packages, you need to distribute also the > source code that went to make up those binary packages (i.e. your > changes/additions and also both upstream sources). > > If you're only distributing source code (e.g. ebuild scripts, patch > files) then there's nothing further you need to do. > >> Would that mean that, if u write software using the portage system, >> that every package that is used by one of your own should be >> available from a server of your own? > > You need to provide the source for all binaries you distribute. > >> If, the developer should also provide it's own file server with all >> those packages, this would cause that every developer that wanted to >> make a overlay should be a Gentoo file mirror? > > Only if they distribute binaries, in which case source should be > provided sufficient to build those binaries. > >> Do my senses run wilde? Your just my imagination? >> Do I understand this right? > > If you're not sure whether something you do is compliant with the > relevant licenses, talk to an appropriate lawyer. > Tanks for the clear explanation. I get the point, I have to distribute only my own sources for the overlay. But when I build a custom Live cd or Stage 3 installation, I have to provide those packages from source also or provide a Gentoo mirror. (which contains those) And I have to look for a lawyer to be sure I do everything right. Then I have got this one question, I don't need a answer too. How free is free software if you need a lawyer and a expensive server just to be able to publish your addition under your own name? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] GPL and Source code providing
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > On Wednesday 28 June 2006 11:21, Mivz wrote: >> Does this obligation, to provide your own source, also count for a none >> Gentoo developer making a overlay tree for one of his projects which is >> licensed under de GPL-2? Because that is a derived distro form Gentoo >> right? > The problem there is with binary packages. The problem does come down to, > then, just GRP and other release methods, like solar's tinderbox and my > Gentoo/Alt stages. For the rest, Gentoo uses sources, not binary packages. > So that would not be when a stage 3 install cd for the Overlay tree is published? Because that cd contains binary precomplied packages. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] GPL and Source code providing
Hello, I have just read the following story, which scared me a bit: http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/23/1728205&tid=150 Does this obligation, to provide your own source, also count for a none Gentoo developer making a overlay tree for one of his projects which is licensed under de GPL-2? Because that is a derived distro form Gentoo right? Would that mean that, if u write software using the portage system, that every package that is used by one of your own should be available from a server of your own? If, the developer should also provide it's own file server with all those packages, this would cause that every developer that wanted to make a overlay should be a Gentoo file mirror? Do my senses run wilde? Your just my imagination? Do I understand this right? Mivz -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] unicode and userlocales useflag
Hello, Recently I converted my system to use unicode support. I used the unicode upgrade guide for that. Now some few updates later, I get errors for missing locales. But I have my LINGUAS configured right. Now I noticed the new /etc/locales.build wich I configured. But nothing changed. Looking at the unicode upgrade guide again, I noticed the reference to the Gentoo Localisation Guide. This tells me to add a none existing USE flag userlocales. It is not described any where. Also emerge world -NuD does not change on userlocales or -userlocales. Am I wrong, or is the documentation wrong? Also locale -a tells me locale: Cannot set LC_CTYPE to default locale: No such file or directory locale: Cannot set LC_MESSAGES to default locale: No such file or directory locale: Cannot set LC_COLLATE to default locale: No such file or directory C POSIX de_DE [EMAIL PROTECTED] en_HK en_PH en_US en_US.utf8 es_MX fa_IR fr_FR [EMAIL PROTECTED] it_IT ja_JP ja_JP.eucjp ja_JP.utf8 probably because NL_nl.UTF-8 is not build anymore? But, my LINGUAS has only "nl en", why do I have de, es, fa, fr, it and ja locales and not nl? Mivz -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] SATA disk slower as /dev/sda then as in /dev/hda
Hello, I have a Intel SATA controler in my laptop and it is adressed as /dev/sda. My cdrom is /dev/hdc. My cdrom drive I can configure with hdparm to use dma and 32-bit io and it has a nice speed: /dev/hdc: Timing cached reads: 1408 MB in 2.00 seconds = 702.55 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads:4 MB in 5.56 seconds = 736.64 kB/sec I can not use hdparm to configure /dev/sda, also sdparm can not set anything: sdparm --set UDMA6=1 /dev/sg0 /dev/sg0: ATA HTS726060M9AT00 MH4O change_mode_page: failed setting page: SAT pATA control This happens with all options, also awre, arre and wce. The speed of this disk: /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 1424 MB in 2.00 seconds = 711.96 MB/sec HDIO_DRIVE_CMD(null) (wait for flush complete) failed: Inappropriate ioctl for device Timing buffered disk reads: 114 MB in 3.00 seconds = 37.95 MB/sec HDIO_DRIVE_CMD(null) (wait for flush complete) failed: Inappropriate ioctl for device Now I tryed a old Gentoo 1.4-rc1 livecd, cause this one loads the disk still as /dev/hda and not sda. After enabling dma, 32bit io and udma: hdparm -X66 -c1 -d1 It had a speed of 2560.00 MB/sec bufferd and 37,65 unbufferd. It was almost 4 times as fast. Why is it that when I use the new kernel SATA drivers and load is as /dev/sda it is slower as with the old IDE drivers? Mivz -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
