Re: MPlayer revisited
Andrew Suffield wrote: with a package where upstream are untrustworthy lying bastards. I have followed the history of mplayer vs Debian, and I saw many flames, but yet this line by Andrew Suffield is an all-time record why isnt it possible to have a civil discussion on this matter? this is sooo sad a. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mplayer, the time has come
hi I have uploaded mplayer 1.0pre6a-3 It ships a correctly repackaged upstream source; it has a 'debian/rules get-orig-source' (as asked in debian-devel) that creates the .orig.tar.gz It should appear in http://qa.debian.org/~anibal/debian-NEW.html and in I will put a copy in http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/sarge please comment a. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mplayer licenses
Adam Warner wrote: I'm please to see what has been done Andrea. I believe the copyright file can be improved by these completely unofficial suggestions (suggestions start with *): This package was first debianized by * TeLeNiEkO * [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:24:04 +0100. Original source can be found at: http://www.mplayerHQ.hu/homepage/ Copyrighted by various authors. Licensed under the terms of GNU GPL. See /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL for details. * How is mplayer licensed under the terms of the GPL when I can't find a licence statement in the original distribution? (perhaps my grepping was incomplete). I thought it was odd that you didn't list the mplayer copyright holders in the above paragraph. Maybe the reason is you couldn't find them. The only reference to mplayer being licensed under the GPL in the original sources is that it contains a debian subdirectory containing the above comment. While I'm aware that mplayer can't be legally licensed under anything but the GPL (given the way the GPL is constructed) it would be nice if mplayer actually contained a LICENSE file or equivalent. mplayer is more than the sum of its parts. Thankfully I have located such a statement on the website: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/homepage/design6/info.html License MPlayer can be distributed under the GPL v2 license. Please amend the copyright file to refer to the GNU GPL version 2. And link to the website licence statement. Hopefully upstream will make this clearer in a future release. OK --- libvo/vo_pgm.c libvo/vo_md5.c * Copyright (C) 1996, MPEG Software Simulation Group. All Rights Reserved. ... WAL [2nd e-mail] OK. I looked again, but I could not find anything WAL from the MSSG reference decoder there. I think it's clean. AMS so the copyright is bogus. The Debian patches the above two AMS files to refer to this explanation. * These files now refer to a non-existing file: * (Mennucc1: the copyright was bogus. Read README.Debian.2) I'd suggest this rewrite: * (Mennucc1: MPEG Software Simulation Group copyright no longer applies as the reference decoder was rewritten. Refer /usr/share/doc/mplayer/copyright for details) OK ... * Please consider looking up and quoting this mail and patching xa_gsm.c with a comment that the code is distributed under the GPL. This info contradicts comments in the file that indicate it is permissively licensed (with a request to be informed about uses and bugs--it's only a request so it's DFSG-free). I will ask Gabucino there is still a (minor) unresolved issue (sorry if I am incorrect in the below part... I am no good at 'legal') during the flames in 2002-03 in debian-legal, it was pointed out that , since mplayer contains many GPL code from other GPL libraries, with heavy modifications, and since GPL asks that such modifications be in some ways declared, this shoul be done * The above makes you look unprofessional. Quote the relevant section of the GPL v2: 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change. State that many of the files are missing changelogs. OK on the other hand, the mplayer docs and source usually references many many what? the copyright file is incomplete. CORRECTED ... so , I have just added a statement in README.Debian * Your distribution doesn't contain a README.Debian file! (note the capitalisation). * README.Debian (when renamed) renamed You refer to debian/changelog. The changelog states: * uploaded to Debian. The source code was scrutinized for licenses and copyrights. Read debian/changelog for a detailed discussion. The changelog tells one to read the changelog!. Can you also provide the path to the correct file when installed. corrected * Could you rewrite this paragraph in a way that is less disparaging of your fellow developers: ``I personally want to trust that a piece of code stating GPL or LGPL is indeed DFSG complaint; if mantainers were so paranoids as to NOT trust licenses in source files (and e.g. think that the code may come from a non-free project but was simply relabelled), then it would be humanly impossible to add code to Debian at all. And similarly for tracking any change to any code: this requirement would make it so hard to actually reuse the code, that it void the spirit of GPL, that is, have code, will share, everybody enjoys.'' I believe your point can be expressed in this sentence: I trust that code purporting to be the copyright of a
subscribe
subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[no subject]
subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
another mplayer .deb of 0.90rc3 release
hello to everybody here is another package of mplayer :-) (prepared for Debian testing) http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer Here is the history of our effort. --- In Sep 2001, Dariush filed an Intent to Package mplayer for Debian. I wished to sponsor. We decided (~1 year ago) to try to put together a package of mplayer that would be accepted into the mainstream Debian distribution. I had these priorities in mind: 0) package must comply with Debian Free Software Guideline (DFSG) and with Debian policy 1) package must be lintian clean (as much as possible) 2) package should be well designed: debconf configuration split documentation split gmplayer 3) package should offer some extras such as: automatic codec download flexible debian/rules that can be used by users for custom packages mencoder and other tools (and the general rule: keep it simple) BTW: we knew that Christian Marillat would not mantain an official Debian package. [http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200301/msg00815.html] Moreover, last time I looked into it, his packages contained some extra features (e.g. lame) that are not accepted in Debian. This was indeed discussed in the above thread. So, we read all the licenses and copyrights (Debian is very picky about it), we waited until mplayer had runtime CPU detetection, and until it had an opensource debugged DivX player; then we prepared a package, and we proposed it Debian in october. It was refused, since ftp-installer asked more clarifications on some licenses (there are files with strange copyrights, see libvo/vo_md5.c as an example). So we started again. We asked the authors some clarifications on licenses. Now we think that we have a package that suits 0 and 1; so I uploaded it into the incoming queue. We are waiting for ftp-installer to reply. Note that our package still needs some work on issues 2 and 3. In the meantime Robert Nagy has posted another ITP http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200301/msg00796.html I am currenty exchanging e-mails with him. I am trying to merge the best of the two packaging. --- Someone asked: Why bother? Because 'mplayer' is an hell of a wonderful program! With the help of the win32 codecs (that the script /usr/share/mplayer/scripts/win32codecs.sh will automatically download), it plays any kind of movie clip that I have ever downloaded from Internet (and I have a big collection), included Microsoft, Quicktime, Realplayer formats. --- So now I am asking if people can test our package. debian-legal: please read debian/README.Debian.2 in the source; do you think that it is/isn't fit to go into Debian? debian-devel: any comment/critics? --- btw: I stumbled into http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200301/msg01712.html I think that all issues are solved by now (AFAIK Arpi was asking not to distribute binaries before run-time-cpu-detection); but for point 4. So if people on debian-legal thinks that it is important, I will add a diff of libmpeg2. --- have fun a. -- Andrea Mennucc E' un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa! (Tonino Carotone)
Re: subscribe
subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] sorry: yesterday evening I commented out the lines #on wakeup: # boot brain/0 I am now self-patching with the help of a java-cup a. -- Andrea Mennucc E' un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa! (Tonino Carotone)
Re: Netscape on Alpha?
hi I am not good at legal issues so I am cross posting this to debian-legal the problem: Debian Alpha is lacking a good browser the solution: there is a version of Netscape 4.7-4 that was compiled by Compaq for Tru64; this version is also distributed by RedHat for Alpha; some people have passed it thru alien and installed it, and it works; it would take me 20 minutes to upload it into Debian archives (unstable/non-free) the question: it contains some libraries by Compaq: can I upload it? The license follows. thanks. On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 01:11:01PM +0100, Kerstin Hoef-Emden wrote: Hi, On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Andrea Mennucc wrote: what about uploading that package to the debian archives, in non-free? Do the license of Compaq and the Debian policy allow this? Presumably a debian-maintainer with access-permission for uploads has to do this? The package is 16.6 MB large and this is the dpkg -I output: new debian package, version 2.0. size 16583190 bytes: control archive= 6444 bytes. 0 bytes, 0 lines conffiles 1582 bytes,38 lines control 15331 bytes, 197 lines md5sums 257 bytes, 8 lines * postinst #!/bin/sh 194 bytes, 6 lines * prerm#!/bin/sh Package: netscape Version: 4.7-4 Section: alien Priority: extra Architecture: alpha Installed-Size: 34054 Maintainer: Kerstin Hoef-Emden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: Netscape prebuilt for Alpha Linux The Alpha Tru64 Unix version of Netscape, which runs on Alpha Linux. Requires COFF support in the kernel. There may be problems running Java due to differences in the thread models between Tru64 Unix and Linux. This RPM embeds the instructions at http://www.alphalinux.org/docs/netscape_du.shtml. Includes some Compaq Tru64 Unix libraries. . Disclaimer of Warranty: . The products and product information furnished hereunder are furnished AS IS without warranty, service or support of any kind. You assume all risks as to the quality or performance of the products and responsibility for any costs associated with the service or support of the products. COMPAQ disclaims all implied warranties including, without limitation, all implied warranties of merchantability and fitness. . Limitation of Liability: . In no event will COMPAQ be liable for any damages whatsoever, including loss of data or use, lost profits, or any incidential or consequential damages arising out of or in connection with this agreement or the use or performance of the products, whether in an action of contract or tort including negligence. . %changes Repackaged to install files directly rather than by running a script to unpack a tar file. . Moved install directories from /usr/local/... to /usr/lib/... to match RedHat 6.1 for Intel. EOF--- ps: please someone send me a link to an URL from which I may download the .rpm and the .deb a. -- A Mennucc E' un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa! (Renato Carotone) pgpHo3Cp3vDRM.pgp Description: PGP signature
