Hi Jim,
> Imagine if Microsoft demanded that everybody had to use a certain
> license in order to run on top of their operating system.
Well, they do actually.
Microsoft charges for the licences to use it's ``operating systems''.
If the Freeware community produces software that ends up helping
What is the proper section for Perl modules? Should they go into
devel, interpreters, libs, what?
I am a little confused about this since Perl modules kinda fit the
descriptions for all of those.
--
John Goerzen | Running Debian GNU/Linux (www.debian.org)
Custom Programming|
[EMAI
pgpZHFB2uUNIM.pgp
Description: PGP message
On 1 Jun 1997, John Goerzen wrote:
> Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, joost witteveen wrote:
> >
> > > Non-free it is
> >
> > No. If the author forbids distribution a changed (i.e. bug fixed)
> > _binary_ version, I think the package may not even go into n
Hi,
I can get version 2.1.37 to work -- 38, 39, 40, and 41 have
hung badly (have yet to try 42)
manoj
--
"My past is my own." The Shadow (DC Comics)
Manoj Srivastava mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mobile, Alabama USAhttp://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Hi,
>>"Colin" == Colin Telmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Colin> modutils: /usr/doc/modules/examples/Stacking/modversions.h
Colin> So my question is, does kernel-package put that file into the
Colin> source tree? Or, more generally, how did it get into my source
Colin> tree?
You
On Jun 2, Paul Haggart wrote
:
: Mgetty is quite a few versions behind.. is anyone actively maintaining this
: package? If not, I have enough free time now to take it.
:
I thought about it, but didn't manage it. (Since I'd have to remove
all debmake stuff ...) And first I should finish the
On 2 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
> > Now, when you link -- statically or dynamically -- you are including
> > portions of libc5 in your binary. This results in your binary being
>
> Umm, no, actually -- the whole point of dynamic linking is that you're
> *not* including portions of libc5 in yo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Hands) wrote on 02.06.97 in
<"sS5XS1.0.gy5.Mhgap"@debian>:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > for SmallEiffel (which I am packaging) to work at all, it needs an
> > env-variable to be set.
>
> Is it not possible to patch the program, to default to the value that you
> were g
On Jun 2, Raul Miller wrote
>
> [Note: what RMS is trying to argue against is the stunt
> Steve Jobs & Co. pulled with Objective C.]
Could you describe what the said 'stunt' was? I'm curious...
Christian
pgpyv2Q82qumI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> In anticipation of Debian being released (publically)for platforms
> other than ix86 it would be a good idea to phase out the use of
> the binary -> binary-i386 link on the ftp sites as this could
> cause confusion. Is there anything that actually uses this link?
Very
On Fri, 30 May 1997, Philip Hands wrote:
> What were you trying to achieve ? --- it might be simpler than you think.
>
> I just discovered that most of my alias handling under qmail was drivel, and
> could be dome much more simply.
>
> > If someone wants to spend some time on a simple mailer ha
> On Jun 2, Jim Pick wrote
> > The cygwin.dll case in an example where the GPL is being used to restrict
> > the
> > rights of other people using the code so that they can't do something taboo
> > such as charge money, while at the same time, reserving the right for the
> > authors to do the ex
On Jun 1, Galen Hazelwood wrote
> My understanding was that if a shared library is GPL'd rather than
> LGPL'd, linking commercial programs against it is illegal unless you
> provide source. The LGPL removes that restriction, and that's why glibc
> (as well as libg++) uses the LGPL.
Static linking
On Mon, 26 May 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> On Mon, 26 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> > I agree 100% with what Ian says. (Let's do it)
>
> Me too! (I didn't know that such a simple solution is possible :-)
>
> So what about the other keys? I suggest that all character keys, symbols,
> etc.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
J.H.M.Dassen wrote:
> Is it possible to rebuild a debian source package (that uses debmake),
> through the "build" command, signing it with another PGP key than the one
> belonging to the maintainer in debian/changelog without modifying the source
> (i.e. by pro
On 30 May 1997, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lees) wrote on 27.05.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > There are ways to avoid this. For example, modify dpkg not to include any
> > line with "config=yes" in it in the md5sum of certain files.
>
> This is a troll, right?
Wrong.
>
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Christian Hudon wrote:
>
> > On Jun 1, Jason Gunthorpe wrote
> > >
> > > There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS
> > > interface compatible drivers for the various GUS based cards. But they are
>
On Jun 2, Jim Pick wrote
> The cygwin.dll case in an example where the GPL is being used to restrict the
> rights of other people using the code so that they can't do something taboo
> such as charge money, while at the same time, reserving the right for the
> authors to do the exact same thing.
Is it possible to rebuild a debian source package (that uses debmake),
through the "build" command, signing it with another PGP key than the one
belonging to the maintainer in debian/changelog without modifying the source
(i.e. by providing command-line options to "build")?
Ray
--
LEADERSHIP A f
Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> I really must admit I find the GPL very cryptic, it's hard to say exactly
> what it means if you look at very small detail. I do think that it makes
> sense however that you should be able to put RCS in a dll and link to the
> dll.
That depends, if you put it in a .dll, a
> [ I've not been following this thread too closely,
> so if I've got the wrong idea, please forgive me ]
>
> > The GPL is a very restrictive license. In many ways, it is just as
> > restrictive as the Qt license. Particularily in the case of libraries,
> > using it as Cygnus is doing (to ma
On Jun 1, Craig Sanders wrote
> It should NOT attempt to be some universal replacement for
> package-specific config files.
i agree.
> All that is needed is a set of "key=value" pairs in a plain text file. Take
> a look at FreeBSD's /etc/sysconfig or NextStep's /etc/hostconfig for an
> example.
On Jun 1, Kai Henningsen wrote
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Craig Sanders) wrote on 01.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > The config database should be regarded as a convenience for
> > {pre,post}{inst,rm} scripts and /etc/init.d/ boot time scripts only.
>
> Well, that was what started the discussion,
> However, the unique interface issue does exist with regard to gzip,
> since that is purely a GPLed product. I think a libgzip or a gzip.dll
> would run into the same issues as the libdb did.
Not to distract from the original point (thank you for the clearer
explanation of the libmp issue!) no
Buddha Buck wrote:
>However, the unique interface issue does exist with regard to gzip,
>since that is purely a GPLed product. I think a libgzip or a gzip.dll
>would run into the same issues as the libdb did.
The source code to the zlib library has been released together with ssh
with a non-GP
In anticipation of Debian being released (publically)for platforms
other than ix86 it would be a good idea to phase out the use of
the binary -> binary-i386 link on the ftp sites as this could
cause confusion. Is there anything that actually uses this link?
- Sue
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAIL
>
> On 2 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
>
> > For some more perspective on the "interface" argument, go back and see
> > some of the flaming a year or two ago about the GNU "libmp" (multiple
> > precision integer math library.) See also the discussion of just a
> > week or three ago about a company
right, usually that means "mirror sites only" and then in a day or two
they'll all change the modes together. (This keeps the master site
from getting flooded; I remember Jim Gettys posting about people
connecting to ftp.x.org which was a heavily loaded Sony NEWS machine
buried off a local net in
Mgetty is quite a few versions behind.. is anyone actively maintaining this
package? If not, I have enough free time now to take it.
--
Paul Haggart - phaggart at cybertap dot com - Debian Linux - PGP 0xD61313E9
"Is all the world jails and churches?" - Rage Against the Machine
--
TO UNSUBSC
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Gunthorpe) wrote on 01.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I really must admit I find the GPL very cryptic, it's hard to say exactly
> what it means if you look at very small detail. I do think that it makes
> sense however that you should be able to put RCS in a dll and link
Michael Neuffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I just had a look at ftp.xfree86.org.
> They finally have 3.3 out.
Yeah, but the permissions on /pub/XFree86/3.3 don't let you look at
it:
XFree86:/pub/XFree86> ls -l
[...]
drwxr-xr-x 6 7011190 1024 Oct 1 1994 2.1/
drwxr-xr-x 6 7011190
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> Craig Sanders:
> > This is not only simple to implement, but it is also simple to
> > parse...
>
> Not quite so simple. If you need to allow all characters in the
> values, which requires using escapes and stuff, and consequently
> also makes it more di
Where do I find it? I read somewhere it fixes that nasty dpkg-source bug.
Michael
--
Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager | [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
topsystem Systemhaus GmbH| Phone: (+49) 2405/4670-44
Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20 | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10
52146
> > None of the Infocom games can be distributed, however. You have to
> > buy them.
>
> Heh. I guess that means we cant package up any of these then
>
> ftp://ftp.gmd.de/if-archive
No, but you can leave a pointer to this place in the description somewhere.
See the "apple2" package descrip
On Jun 1, Jim Pick wrote
> Actually, I had a very similar polite argument with RMS via private e-mail
> (about linking Java libs with mixed GPL/LGPL/proprietary licenses). He
> was pretty solid on the fact that run-time linking is the same as
> "compiled-in" linking.
Yep, once the run-time linkin
On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Michael Neuffer wrote:
>
> >This is not necessary. gcc 2.8 includes the pentium optimizations
> >from pgcc.
>
> All of it?
No not all, they took a stable subset.
Mike
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAI
On May 26, Brian C. White wrote
> Hamm (Debian 2.0)
Some more ideas/goals:
* PAM-mify at least the essential authentication programs (passwd, su,...)
and preferably all programs that require authentication (POP clients,
webservers, ...).
http://parc.power.net/morgan/Linux-PAM/>.
From th
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>
>On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Christian Hudon wrote:
>
>> On Jun 1, Jason Gunthorpe wrote
>> >
>> > There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS
>> > interface compatible drivers for the various GUS based cards. But they are
>> > not inclu
> I'm writing my phd-thesis at the moment and time is getting
> shorter, so I do have to give away the ssh-package. I should
> be taken by someone in the *free world*.
Ok, I'll take it --- I use it all the time anyway, so it should be no hardship.
Also, it's about time I tried a multi-target pack
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> for SmallEiffel (which I am packaging) to work at all, it needs an
> env-variable to be set.
Is it not possible to patch the program, to default to the value that you were
going to write into /etc/profile ?
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "un
[ I've not been following this thread too closely,
so if I've got the wrong idea, please forgive me ]
> The GPL is a very restrictive license. In many ways, it is just as
> restrictive as the Qt license. Particularily in the case of libraries,
> using it as Cygnus is doing (to make money) goe
Hi all,
I'm writing my phd-thesis at the moment and time is getting
shorter, so I do have to give away the ssh-package. I should
be taken by someone in the *free world*.
The next thing to do would be to split the package into
a us and a non-us version (i.e., with-out and with rsaref compiled).
O
As I've already written I prepared asr-manpages...
And there are more packages I'm working on now:
- slay - tiny script to kill all processes a user has. This is ready.
- asmail - a utility similar to xbiff but with more power and AfterStep
look and feel. This isn't done yet, but will be soon.
Michael Neuffer wrote:
>This is not necessary. gcc 2.8 includes the pentium optimizations
>from pgcc.
All of it?
My impression from the pgcc FAQ at http://www.goof.com/ was that only
some optimizations (mostly instruction scheduling) will be taken from
pgcc. The rather active pgcc development
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
I just had a look at ftp.xfree86.org.
They finally have 3.3 out.
Mike
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBM5J+gUAgIJ53sbT9AQEJ8gP/XaRFImH2den6zE5uMTct5YX4yrUKkxMS
LZyHcbgLQ+DyLIsxdhtykHja0IBeScc/gtpeKRu6Co6O5dBAdRlHMVw3i6TT
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> >I don't think it does any optimization at all for pentium.
>
> Correct. Of course, there's the experimental pgcc (http://www.goof.com/,
> if anybody wants to look).
>
> I'd like to pack this up and stuff it into experimental, if I had a
> little more t
On May 30, 2:40pm, Martin Alonso Soto Jacome wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> I just downloaded the enlightenment window manager (see
> http://www.cse.unsw.EDU.AU/~s2154962/enlightenment/). It is somewhat slow
> and
> requieres a lot of memory and disk, but is very funny to see, anyway.
It's a greee
On May 28, 12:55pm, Joey Hess wrote:
> Buddha Buck:
> > Personally, I question placing them in the main distribution at all
> > (including non-free and contrib). I have nothing wrong with the
> > contents (if available, it would be installed on my system rather
> > quickly), but rather the unwa
Hello,
for SmallEiffel (which I am packaging) to work at all, it needs an
env-variable to be set. Should it be set with a preinst-script? I
wouldn't like that to happen to my system, but I don't see any other
way, if it should be set at all. Should I just put a prominent note
in /usr/doc/smalleiff
There already is a tkinfo package (version 1.3). cas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is
listed as the maintainer.
Cheers,
- Jim
pgpjw0BNcP82y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Is there someone else who might take this packaging? I don't have time yet.
Erick
--- Start of forwarded message ---
Return-Path:
Date: Fri, 30 May 97 22:42:29 PDT
From: Axel Boldt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Info package: .dsc missing. And: TkInfo
Content-Type: tex
> For some more perspective on the "interface" argument, go back and see
> some of the flaming a year or two ago about the GNU "libmp" (multiple
> precision integer math library.)
Actually, I had a very similar polite argument with RMS via private e-mail
(about linking Java libs with mixed GPL/LG
On 2 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
> For some more perspective on the "interface" argument, go back and see
> some of the flaming a year or two ago about the GNU "libmp" (multiple
> precision integer math library.) See also the discussion of just a
> week or three ago about a company shipping a co
> Now, when you link -- statically or dynamically -- you are including
> portions of libc5 in your binary. This results in your binary being
Umm, no, actually -- the whole point of dynamic linking is that you're
*not* including portions of libc5 in your binary. A replacement libc5
that met the "i
On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Christian Hudon wrote:
> On Jun 1, Jason Gunthorpe wrote
> >
> > There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS
> > interface compatible drivers for the various GUS based cards. But they are
> > not included in the official kernel, you have to get it an
On Jun 1, Jason Gunthorpe wrote
>
> There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS
> interface compatible drivers for the various GUS based cards. But they are
> not included in the official kernel, you have to get it and build it as a
> module yourself :<
Is it useable? Is
On 2 Jun 1997, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Gunthorpe) wrote on 01.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > On 1 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
> >
> > > > I believe libc5.so is LGPL...
> > >
> > > I don't. /usr/doc/libc5//copyright doesn't *mention* the LGPL *at
> > > all*, thou
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Someone who wanted to put the effort into supporting the drivers and could
> convince Linus to go along could probably change the situation - I hope such
> a person comes along.
There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS
interfa
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Galen Hazelwood wrote:
> Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> > On 1 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
> >
> > > > I believe libc5.so is LGPL...
> > >
> > > I don't. /usr/doc/libc5//copyright doesn't *mention* the LGPL *at
> > > all*, though the libc6 one mentions both.
> >
> > Yep, t
Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, joost witteveen wrote:
>
> > Non-free it is
>
> No. If the author forbids distribution a changed (i.e. bug fixed)
> _binary_ version, I think the package may not even go into non-free.
>
> What do the others think?
Before we
> I just brought this up, since it was my understanding that if you
> want to write a commercial program (ie. not under the GPL), and
> link it against cygwin.dll, you've got to pay Cygnus $$$. Not all
> that different than the restrictions on Qt, really.
Actually, it is different. GPL-ed softwar
From: Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Only NON-COMMERCIAL distribution allowed.
That puts it in non-free.
> Redistribution of modified versions by other people than myself is not
> allowed.
That too. We are going to start supporting unmodified source + Debian
deltas, but never unmodified
From: Mark Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As for OSS -- I had the impression that if I submitted patches to make
> the modules *accept* command line arguments, they wouldn't be
> included. But yeah, if they're straight GPL'ed that's good enough; I
> could still distribute such patches even if they w
Vincent Renardias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Has any of you had a look at this:
> ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/Incoming/pttyd-0.9.tgz
>
> [its LSM file says:
>
> Description:The Pseudo-tty Daemon. Changes ownership on the slave
> pseudo-tty's in an appropriate manner, m
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Schwarz) wrote on 01.06.97 in <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Where is the arch specification string used, i.e. what will break if we
> > change it to be "i386-linux" on intel systems?
>
> I'm not competent enough to answer
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> > Yes, very limiting. The code actually cannot be linked statically!
>
> Can't be linked dynamically either... read the GPL.
>
I'm not sure from a copyright standpoint how that works. A copyright
means that you are protected from me using your copyri
Amos> Or an audit-trail of invocations of dpkg (e.g. "adduser 3.1-2
Amos> installed and configured successfully on Wed May 29 1997 00:00:23,
Amos> replaced adduser-3.1-0")
Darren> I asked for this a while back and was told that not very many
Darren> people wanted it. I still think it
68 matches
Mail list logo
