Re: Mounting a USB drive (windows format)
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 02:05:29PM -0500, Jeffrey Kesselman wrote: More Diagnosis: I bought an OLPC in the buy one/give one so i just tried the USB stick on the real machine and it works fine. So it just my emulated image that is refusing to mount it for some reason :( I'd really like to keep using VMWare. On my machine its both more convenient and much faster then qemu even with the kqemu wedge. (its a 64 bit dual core, but you can't run qemu in 64 bit mode with kqemu ) Has anyoen else gotten emulation under vmware recognizing USB memory stick drives? You need to tell vmware to do this and take away the device from the underlying operating system that vmware is running on. See the vmware documentation for how to do this properly, it's not an OLPC image issue, but rather a vmware one. good luck, greg k-h ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: GPLv3
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 05:36:45AM -0400, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: Greg KH wrote: On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 01:37:46AM -0400, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: Are we going to relicense Sugar and all the software specifically written for the OLPC under the GPLv3? What would the benifit be? The FSF rationale for the GPLv3 is given here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/rms-why-gplv3.html Believe me, I know the FSF rationale quite well :) I was just asking why _you_ think the code should be relicensed. What benefit do you think there is for it? thanks, greg k-h ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: GPLv3
A: No. Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 10:11:18PM +0545, Prasanna Gautam wrote: It doesn't make much difference relicensing because most of the codes involved are in GPL v2 or later anyways. So I think the best strategy is to wait and see what comes up. But maybe GPLv3 can help us counter pontential Tivotization (i.e proprietary competing products using OLPC codebase ... depends how far its good) The whole Tivo issue (I hate that name, the FSF took a company that complied and got their explicit blessing and turned around and vilified them) does not matter at all as it only affects the kernel, which is not changing from v2 at this time. thanks, greg k-h ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: GPLv3
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 01:51:08PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: Bernardo Innocenti [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] Anyway, I was merely wondering rather than pushing for it. If you ask me, yes, I mildly prefer the v3 over the v2. Isn't there a concern that the on-board security firmware in XO would constitute tivoization essentially of the same sort that GPLv3 aims to block? Which is one reason the Linux kernel developers do not agree with that part of the GPLv3 :) thanks, greg k-h ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
