Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 05:35:52PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote: > Am 2006-07-03 09:04:39, schrieb Lars Wirzenius: > > su, 2006-07-02 kello 18:17 -0400, Jason Spiro kirjoitti: > > > * Package name: openwatcom > > > Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, > > > portable code > > You should check the list archives. Others have proposed to package openwatcom, but there are license issues that prevent it from being in debian, even in non-free. Cheers, Daniel -- GnuPG Key Fingerprint 86 F5 81 A5 D4 2E 1F 1C http://gnupg.org And that's my crabbing done for the day. Got it out of the way early, now I have the rest of the afternoon to sniff fragrant tea-roses or strangle cute bunnies or something. -- Michael Devore signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Am 2006-08-18 08:10:27, schrieb John Goerzen: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 05:35:52PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote: > > Am 2006-07-03 09:04:39, schrieb Lars Wirzenius: > > > su, 2006-07-02 kello 18:17 -0400, Jason Spiro kirjoitti: > > > > * Package name: openwatcom > > > > Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, > > > > portable code > > > > > > What does it mean for a compiler to produce portable code? > > > > It produce executables for msdos, wfw311, win32, and linux. > > Erm, no. That's a cross-compiler, isn't it? Any given output isn't > portable (it will run only on one OS), but it can just target multiple > backends. Yes thats right. You have ONE IDE (Windows and Linux are identic) and you can produce on any systems Executable for other systems. Except on DOS and WfW 3.11 where you can produce only 16Bit exes. > And when you say Linux, I assume you mean Linux on i386 only. (Which Right > limits its utility compared to gcc, and means we can't use it to build > any Debian packages). YesNo! ;-9 The OpneWatcom has some extensions which do not exist in gcc but produced Linux executable are running fine on Debian systems. And then there are some C/C++ programs which can not compiled with OpenWatcom. I have create some and packed it up as Debian package. Generaly it is its own system. Greetings Michelle Konzack Systemadministrator Tamay Dogan Network Debian GNU/Linux Consultant -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant # Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi 0033/6/6192519367100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 05:35:52PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote: > Am 2006-07-03 09:04:39, schrieb Lars Wirzenius: > > su, 2006-07-02 kello 18:17 -0400, Jason Spiro kirjoitti: > > > * Package name: openwatcom > > > Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, > > > portable code > > > > What does it mean for a compiler to produce portable code? > > It produce executables for msdos, wfw311, win32, and linux. Erm, no. That's a cross-compiler, isn't it? Any given output isn't portable (it will run only on one OS), but it can just target multiple backends. And when you say Linux, I assume you mean Linux on i386 only. (Which limits its utility compared to gcc, and means we can't use it to build any Debian packages). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Am 2006-07-03 09:04:39, schrieb Lars Wirzenius: > su, 2006-07-02 kello 18:17 -0400, Jason Spiro kirjoitti: > > * Package name: openwatcom > > Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable > > code > > What does it mean for a compiler to produce portable code? It produce executables for msdos, wfw311, win32, and linux. (I am using DJGPP since around 14 years and OpenWatcom since 8 years) Greetings Michelle Konzack Systemadministrator Tamay Dogan Network Debian GNU/Linux Consultant -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant # Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi 0033/6/6192519367100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 18:17:20 -0400 "Jason Spiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > > * Package name: openwatcom > Version : I plan to do version 1.4 (or 1.6, if it comes out > soon) Upstream Author : an independent team of volunteer contributors > * URL : http://www.openwatcom.org/ > * License : Sybase Open Watcom Public License 1.0 (it is > OSI-approved) Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce But is it DFSG-approved? I think not. Take for instance the "click-wrap" clause which is specifically pointed out as a no-go for debian. There are other problems with the license too, but this goes, at best, in non-free. Cheers, Daniel - -- And that's my crabbing done for the day. Got it out of the way early, now I have the rest of the afternoon to sniff fragrant tea-roses or strangle cute bunnies or something. -- Michael Devore -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFErNWIhvWBpdQuHxwRAuzSAJ9B8IyyiGE7h1magGE70LSwzmlEEACeIZjm fuBavv2LPINAnK95yz4/90Y= =6or3 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: > > >From DFSG FAQ Draft ( http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html ): > This document mostly represents the opinion of the "DFSG revisionists", > so it's hardly a surprise that supports the "we decide what is non-free" > school of tought (sic). I'm the primary author of that document, so please excuse me when I ask: What the fsck are you talking about? That DFSG FAQ document is an attempt, with contributions by many, to explain the DFSG and Debian license policies, as practiced. It was written before the GFDL general resolution, and to the best of my ability says nothing particularly controversial about the GFDL. It is in fact agnostic on the issue of the freedom of the GFDL sans cover texts etc. If you have any particular suggestions for improvement, or have found what you feel to be factual errors or biases that should be corrected, I'd appreciate it if you would bring them to my attention. This might be more productive than making sly whacky criticisms that I can't even understand. I don't even know what a "DFSG revisionist" is supposed to be! Are you one? Am I? Please help, I can't even tell which side I'm on, or who the players are! -- Barak A. Pearlmutter Hamilton Institute & Dept Comp Sci, NUI Maynooth, Co. Kildare, Ireland http://www.bcl.hamilton.ie/~barak/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Marco d'Itri wrote: > Bullshit. The only criteria for defining freedom for the purposes of > Debian *is* the DFSG. Under a strict reading of the DFSG, I'm not sure how a license that prohibits running the code would fail. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Jul 03, Roberto Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, the DFSG was written by people. Additionally, most software > licenses are written by people. It is no surprise that deciding which > licenses actually comply with the DFSG is a process which requires > people to make the decision. Sure. The surprise is when different people start pushing a different meaning of the rules... -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Le 03-07-2006, Sebastian Harl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > > On the website it says it's a cross compiler, that is to say you can produce > code for different target platforms on one host platform. > > Maybe you should change the description to something like "C/C++ cross > compilers and IDE". Saying that a compiler produces portable code is wrong > imho (Even the Java compiler does not really produce portable code - the Ja= > va > binary code only runs on the Java VM. The Java VM itself is portable though= >=2E). Good point. I have fixed my debian/control file as shown below. - Source: openwatcom Section: devel Priority: extra Maintainer: Jason Spiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Standards-Version: 3.7.2.0 Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 5) Package: openwatcom Architecture: any Description: C/C++ cross-compiler and IDE that produce efficient code Open Watcom includes a C/C++ IDE and a full set of command-line tools for compilation, including the superb Watcom debugger. It emits easy-to-understand errors and warnings when things go wrong. Current outstanding issues include imperfect template support and an inability to dynamically link with shared libraries built by GCC. Also, the debugger does not seem to work properly in Linux. The Open Watcom Fortran compiler is not included in this package. The Open Watcom instruction manuals are also not included in this package; most of the manuals are available for viewing on the web. . Open Watcom generates well-optimized statically linked binaries for Linux, Win32, Win16, OS/2, QNX, NetWare, and DOS real and protected mode, among other targets. Open Watcom is known to work on the i386 platform. In the past, it has also supported other platforms, including PowerPC, SPARC, MIPS, and Alpha AXP, and may still work on those platforms as well. - In case you are wondering, openwatcom has no dependencies. The Watcom compiler and other binaries are statically linked with the bits of the Watcom runtime that they depend on. The Watcom tradition has always been static linking. -- When you open Windows, bugs get in! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Marco d'Itri wrote: On Jul 03, Miriam Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >From DFSG FAQ Draft ( http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html ): This document mostly represents the opinion of the "DFSG revisionists", so it's hardly a surprise that supports the "we decide what is non-free" school of tought. Well, the DFSG was written by people. Additionally, most software licenses are written by people. It is no surprise that deciding which licenses actually comply with the DFSG is a process which requires people to make the decision. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Jul 03, Miriam Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >From DFSG FAQ Draft ( http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html ): This document mostly represents the opinion of the "DFSG revisionists", so it's hardly a surprise that supports the "we decide what is non-free" school of tought. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
>From DFSG FAQ Draft ( http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html ): Q: How can I tell if a license is a free software license, by Debian's standards? A: The process involves human judgement. The DFSG is an attempt to articulate our criteria. But the DFSG is not a contract. This means that if you think you've found a "loophole" in the DFSG then you don't quite understand how this works. The DFSG is a potentially imperfect attempt to express what "freeness" in software means to Debian. It is not something whose letter we argue about. It is not a law. Rather, it is a set of guidelines. Miry --- Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > On Jul 03, Jacobo Tarrio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Not the only criteria. People are very inventive when it comes to > creating > > new software licenses with new restrictions which fit the letter of the > DFSG > > because, hey, the DFSG say nothing about licenses that make you cut off a > > part of your own body every time you download the software! > Bullshit. The only criteria for defining freedom for the purposes of > Debian *is* the DFSG. > It's this attitude of "DFSG is not restrictive enough, let's invent a > few new restrictions which we like" that is screwing Debian (and our > users). __ LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo. Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto. http://es.voice.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
El lunes, 3 de julio de 2006 a las 10:06:56 +0200, Marco d'Itri escribía: > It's this attitude of "DFSG is not restrictive enough, let's invent a > few new restrictions which we like" that is screwing Debian (and our > users). You've got it backwards. -- Jacobo Tarrío | http://jacobo.tarrio.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Jul 03, Jacobo Tarrio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not the only criteria. People are very inventive when it comes to creating > new software licenses with new restrictions which fit the letter of the DFSG > because, hey, the DFSG say nothing about licenses that make you cut off a > part of your own body every time you download the software! Bullshit. The only criteria for defining freedom for the purposes of Debian *is* the DFSG. It's this attitude of "DFSG is not restrictive enough, let's invent a few new restrictions which we like" that is screwing Debian (and our users). -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
El lunes, 3 de julio de 2006 a las 09:41:18 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson escribía: > > I'd say that the freedom to use the program in any way I see fit is a > > necessary freedom. > Sorry, but the criteria for inclusion in main is the DFSG, not whatever > ideas people might have of necessary freedoms :-) Not the only criteria. People are very inventive when it comes to creating new software licenses with new restrictions which fit the letter of the DFSG because, hey, the DFSG say nothing about licenses that make you cut off a part of your own body every time you download the software! -- Jacobo Tarrío | http://jacobo.tarrio.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 09:30:25AM +0200, Jacobo Tarrio wrote: > I'd say that the freedom to use the program in any way I see fit is a > necessary freedom. Sorry, but the criteria for inclusion in main is the DFSG, not whatever ideas people might have of necessary freedoms :-) /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
El lunes, 3 de julio de 2006 a las 01:36:12 +0100, Matthew Garrett escribía: > Ok, but it still needs to be modified. Are you suggesting that the > freedom to produce a binary that can't be recompiled by anyone else is a > necessary freedom? I'd say that the freedom to use the program in any way I see fit is a necessary freedom. -- Jacobo Tarrío | http://jacobo.tarrio.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
> > What does it mean for a compiler to produce portable code? > > > Good question. I do not have personal experience with this, but I am > told you can write your code once and then recompile it for a wide > variety of platforms On the website it says it's a cross compiler, that is to say you can produce code for different target platforms on one host platform. Maybe you should change the description to something like "C/C++ cross compilers and IDE". Saying that a compiler produces portable code is wrong imho (Even the Java compiler does not really produce portable code - the Java binary code only runs on the Java VM. The Java VM itself is portable though.). Cheers, Sebastian -- Sebastian "tokkee" Harl GnuPG-ID: 0x8501C7FC http://tokkee.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Le 03-07-2006, Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > su, 2006-07-02 kello 18:17 -0400, Jason Spiro kirjoitti: >> Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable >> code > > What does it mean for a compiler to produce portable code? > Good question. I do not have personal experience with this, but I am told you can write your code once and then recompile it for a wide variety of platforms, including DOS and various embedded boards, with few or no modifications. The runtime provides nice features that old platforms like DOS don't provide. Hmmm, I wonder if the runtime is portable to Mac OS X on Intel CPUs... Cheers, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- When you open Windows, bugs get in! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Hello, i did not understand. Are you saying that the compiler? Openwatcom: open source multi platform c/c++ and fortran compiler. Url: http://www.openwatcom.org There that at one, watcom c: c/c++ compiler I hope, You don't mix with this. Regards, > Lars Wirzenius wrote: >> su, 2006-07-02 kello 18:17 -0400, Jason Spiro kirjoitti: >>> * Package name: openwatcom >>> Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, >>> portable code >> >> What does it mean for a compiler to produce portable code? >> > > Perhaps it is a Java compiler in disguise? > > -Roberto > > -- > Roberto C. Sanchez > http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto ,''`. Ozgur Karatas : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' http://www.ozgurkaratas.com `-Powered By GNU\Linux -- *** Bu mail Antivirus taramasindan gecmistir (ISTANBUL UNIVERSITESI) *** This e-mail was scanned by Antivirus.(ISTANBUL UNIVERSITY) --
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Lars Wirzenius wrote: su, 2006-07-02 kello 18:17 -0400, Jason Spiro kirjoitti: * Package name: openwatcom Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code What does it mean for a compiler to produce portable code? Perhaps it is a Java compiler in disguise? -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
su, 2006-07-02 kello 18:17 -0400, Jason Spiro kirjoitti: > * Package name: openwatcom > Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable > code What does it mean for a compiler to produce portable code? -- One does not see anything until one sees its beauty. -- O.W. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 01:36:12AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "use", like, for example, compile a piece of software. You don't > > need to distribute openwatcom to anyone to fall within this clause. > > Ok, but it still needs to be modified. Are you suggesting that the > freedom to produce a binary that can't be recompiled by anyone else is a > necessary freedom? Let's say my modifications to openwatcom consist of changing -O2 to -Os. This is still a modification, and as such, it forces me to distributing it to the entire world for 12 months. Unless I cope with this, I'm limited to compiling things only for: * my "Personal Use" * "R&D" As such, this breaches DFSG6. -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Matthew Garrett wrote: > > Ok, but it still needs to be modified. Are you suggesting that the > freedom to produce a binary that can't be recompiled by anyone else is a > necessary freedom? > > I haven't read the license, and I suggest asking on -legal if you want a full analysis, but the general problems of clauses like that are: * Have to distribute source to people I never distributed binaries too. So I can't make private modifications for a friend (and give source only to him). Nor can I make modifications interesting only to my organization (say, to make it run in a special environment unique to my organization) unless I distribute source (which is useless to anyone else, and which is probably a fair bit of additional work to distribute, especially if I don't already have a website to do it from. * Because I must publicly distribute source, I can not secretly use the software. While there is unlikely to be any problem with my use of a compiler being known (well, at least not today), in other cases this could be a problem: Crypto software, DMCA-circumvention devices, etc. * In order to keep the source publicly available for 12 months, I may have to bear practically unlimited costs: What happens if Slashdot links to my website? What happens if it turns out the software may violate a patent, copyright, etc? With software e.g., under the GPL, I can limit my expenses/legal exposure by ceasing distribution entirely: Take down both the binary and the source. With this clause, I may not. Also, although I'm less sure of the argument, "in order to use this software, you must provide public access to it's source code" sounds like demanding a fee to use it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's not limited to modified versions Yes it is. In fact, it seems to be limited to the modifications themselves, rather than an entire modified source tree. > it's for a period of time far exceeding that of the distribution. Like Mozilla. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > # 1.4 "Deploy" means to use, sublicense or distribute Covered Code > # other than for Your internal research and development (R&D) and/or > # Personal Use, and includes without limitation, any and all internal > # use or distribution of Covered Code within Your business or > # organization except for R&D use and/or Personal Use, as well as > # direct or indirect sublicensing or distribution of Covered Code by > # You to any third party in any form or manner. > > "use", like, for example, compile a piece of software. You don't > need to distribute openwatcom to anyone to fall within this clause. Ok, but it still needs to be modified. Are you suggesting that the freedom to produce a binary that can't be recompiled by anyone else is a necessary freedom? -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 06:50:07PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Adam Borowski wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 06:17:20PM -0400, Jason Spiro wrote: > [snip] > > the moment you use openwatcom to compile any work-related piece > > of software (thus not "Personal Use"), you need to make the > > source of openwatcom publicly available for 12 months. > > Why is "I must make available the compiler's source code" > problematic? It follows in the spirit of that clause of the GPL > which says that if you distribute binaries, you must make the source > code available. By extending it to the compiler, you ensure that > the possibly-modified cc will be available to recreate the executable. It's not limited to modified versions, it's not limited to distribution (only use), it's public distribution (not just "to those you made the binary available to"), and it's for a period of time far exceeding that of the distribution. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 01:10:34AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > the moment you use openwatcom to compile any work-related piece of > > software (thus not "Personal Use"), you need to make the source of > > openwatcom publicly available for 12 months. > > What? > > "You must make Source Code of all Your Deployed Modifications publicly > available under the terms of this License, including the license grants > set forth in Section 3 below, for as long as you Deploy the Covered Code > or twelve (12) months from the date of initial Deployment, whichever is > longer." > > That is, if you modify openwatcom and distribute that modified version > (even internally), you must provide the source code to the modified > version to the public. Some people may find that objectionable, but it > doesn't appear to mean what you claim. # 1.4 "Deploy" means to use, sublicense or distribute Covered Code # other than for Your internal research and development (R&D) and/or # Personal Use, and includes without limitation, any and all internal # use or distribution of Covered Code within Your business or # organization except for R&D use and/or Personal Use, as well as # direct or indirect sublicensing or distribution of Covered Code by # You to any third party in any form or manner. "use", like, for example, compile a piece of software. You don't need to distribute openwatcom to anyone to fall within this clause. -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the moment you use openwatcom to compile any work-related piece of > software (thus not "Personal Use"), you need to make the source of > openwatcom publicly available for 12 months. What? "You must make Source Code of all Your Deployed Modifications publicly available under the terms of this License, including the license grants set forth in Section 3 below, for as long as you Deploy the Covered Code or twelve (12) months from the date of initial Deployment, whichever is longer." That is, if you modify openwatcom and distribute that modified version (even internally), you must provide the source code to the modified version to the public. Some people may find that objectionable, but it doesn't appear to mean what you claim. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Adam Borowski wrote: > On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 06:17:20PM -0400, Jason Spiro wrote: [snip] > the moment you use openwatcom to compile any work-related piece > of software (thus not "Personal Use"), you need to make the > source of openwatcom publicly available for 12 months. Why is "I must make available the compiler's source code" problematic? It follows in the spirit of that clause of the GPL which says that if you distribute binaries, you must make the source code available. By extending it to the compiler, you ensure that the possibly-modified cc will be available to recreate the executable. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is "common sense" really valid? For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEqFuvS9HxQb37XmcRAiqyAKCAP4/LfXEGCfcd44l8JwTJWZp0mgCgznbf jwHgGd62XdLHO5s3BEzn/nA= =Fd52 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 06:17:20PM -0400, Jason Spiro wrote: > * Package name: openwatcom > * License : Sybase Open Watcom Public License 1.0 (it is > OSI-approved) Oops... it looks like OSI smoked something especially bad this time, I'm afraid. This license looks like someone took his time to collect every single problematic clause. Debian-legal may provide you with a clause-by-clause analysis, but let me point out just one particular gem: the moment you use openwatcom to compile any work-related piece of software (thus not "Personal Use"), you need to make the source of openwatcom publicly available for 12 months. Regards, -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: openwatcom Version : I plan to do version 1.4 (or 1.6, if it comes out soon) Upstream Author : an independent team of volunteer contributors * URL : http://www.openwatcom.org/ * License : Sybase Open Watcom Public License 1.0 (it is OSI-approved) Description : C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code Open Watcom includes a C/C++ IDE and a full set of command-line tools for compilation, including the superb Watcom debugger. It emits easy-to-understand errors and warnings when things go wrong. Current outstanding issues include imperfect template support and an inability to dynamically link with shared libraries built by GCC. These will be fixed sooner if you help. :-) There is also an Open Watcom Fortran 77 compiler, but I probably won't package it. I might package the full manual set, or I may just ship the PDFs on the website. I have not checked if the docs are Free or non-Free. Help Wanted === I have started work on the openwatcom package already. If someone is interested in co-maintaining or helping out with it or with an openwatcom-doc package (which may have to go into non-free), please email me. Will I succeed in getting Open Watcom into Debian? == I am not a Debian Developer, and I have never built a Debian package before. Based on the challenges involved, I do not know if I will succeed in making a policy-compliant package: * Open Watcom is a huge package, and it does not use autoconf or automake. It is built using Watcom tools called wmake and builder. Luckily, wmake and pbuilder can be built using GCC / G++. * Open Watcom requires various environment variables to be set before use, which goes against Debian policy. I hope not to use shell scripts wrapping each binary and checking that $WATCOM is set; IMO that would be too big a kludge. Instead, I hope to address this issue by patching the source code, as I have started to do already with the owcc tool. In sum, I do not know if I will succeed in building a finished package or not. If you are curious about how the work is going at any point, or if you want a copy of my work so far, please feel free to email me. The package I have built so far currently installs OK and seems to work for basic use. However, the it installs a bunch of non-executable files to /usr/bin, has no real README, and has many other problems. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
