Re: Intel policy wrt OSS [was: Re: cvs.openbsd.org: src]
Hi, On Sat, 30.09.2006 at 12:43:00 +0200, Maxim Bourmistrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why don't ignore them and don't buy their products? this is easier said than done. > I have already a list of vendors I'm not buying products from anymore, > like Adaptec. I also have such a list which eg. includes D-Link. Wasn't there a site that named no-go vendors? Is it feasible to have such a site w/o being buried in cease-and-desist letters (and lawsuits)? > I'm also encouraging people to buy products from OpenSource-friendly > vendors, like RaLink. That's also what I do, but this doesn't extend well into corporate usage where people often purchase quantities of higher-priced hardware and then realize only afterwards that the stuff doesn't work correctly. OTOH, they want some vendor who can "support" their products, not Joe's Garage who might go bust the next week, or hit a roadside tree. I already had such a case where the planned OpenBSD usage had to be changed to Linux because of hardware support. In the future, if this trend continues, this might mean only some-corporate-non-open-linux-with-binaries (NVidia, Intel, ATI, IBM and some others come to mind), not to speak of *BSD. So, we still need to convince more vendors to do the right thing, and support things like opencores.org or the F-CPU project, if possible. > > These issues affects ALL open operating systems, tell Intel you want > > them to change their policies, tell them you aren't happy. It's your > > money why should they get to screw you around by not supporting their > > products? Fully agreed! Best, --Toni++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Please Help Pass W3C Patent Policy
Hi, On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 04:09:32PM +0100, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > With respect to a Recommendation developed under this policy, a W3C > Royalty-Free license shall mean a non-assignable, non-sublicensable > license to make, have made, use, sell, have sold, offer to sell, > import, and distribute and dispose of implementations of the > Recommendation that: > > [...] > > 3. may be limited to implementations of the Recommendation, and >to what is required by the Recommendation; before having read the whole draft: To me this passage implies that the new policy allows for patents to go into a standard that would only shift the battlefield by restricting Open Source implementations of those standards to the required parts while being forced to leave out the optional parts a standard may have unless you want to fall under those royalty claims. Is this an oversight, am I just reading it wrong, or what the heck should agreeing to such a clause buy us? I just expect new standards under this rule to have lots of optional features and a two class system of applications which only conform to the minimal set, and those which implement the "full" standard. Best, --Toni++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to interrupt the boot process?
Hello all, I just made a *BIG* mistake on my Debian Linux box resulting in not being able to boot that machine anymore... Some problems with lilo and a custom kernel not finding his modules (that also claim to have unresolved symbols). The machine boots until it hangs when trying to access non-existent devices, but after starting some user level daemons already. Falling back to a working kernel doesn't work since I made an error configuring lilo. Booting from the custom floppy resulted in going to the hard disk and then continuing with the normal boot process. Booting the stock installation floppy and getting a root shell didn't help since then I was unable to remount the hard disk as / where it should have been (e.g. to manipulate files with programs relying on shared libraries). Now I have some questions: - How can I stop the boot process half-way to get a single-user root shell? All I did in terms of ^C, ^Q@(#*$& and Alt-any-key didn't help, regardless of where in the boot process I press them. - Is there an equivalent to chroot in Debian Linux (I only can compare to BSD* here). - When having a set of kernels how do I manage to get them all have their individual System.map? - As a quick fix, could somebody of you please point me to a dpkg working under BSD*? I didn't manage to make the port yet, but that would enable me to read further documentation on the CD. Thank you! Regards, Toni. Oeko.neT Mueller & Brandt GbR email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] v: +49 2261 979364 f: +49 2261 979366 Unix, networking, administration, consulting, programming, Internet services -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
