Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack

[Sam Geeraerts]

Sam Geeraerts schreef:

Karl Goetz schreef:

I have changed the status of the bug[1]. Its now NEEDSINFO, BLOCKER,
target release deltah (2.3).

I'll adjust the status when we get word back from the FSF as to their
opinion.

Sam/Benedikt, have either of you emailed the FSF yet?


I assume nobody has up until now, so I've just sent them an email.


I got an answer back from FSF (more specifically: Karl Berry). It looks 
like we're getting off easy. It comes down to: their intent is/was good 
and we're overreacting. :)


Here's the answer in full:

Hi Sam,

The team working on gNewSense are trying to decide what to do about 
the

amslatex software.

My short answer is: include it  :) .

It currently has a non-free license.

Agreed that the current wording is bad, the intent was always that it be
just as free as plain.tex and similar files from Knuth (which Debian
also doesn't like, but that's not our problem).  Those Knuthian files
had that wording for many years.  Anyway.

although the Modifications, and part seems a bit weird (more
like EULA than like copyright license).

I don't understand why you characterize it that way.  I suggested that
wording to AMS specifically to address the problem we often see of
licenses explicitly allowing modification, and explicitly allowing
distribution, but not explicitly allowing distribution of modified
versions.

(Just for the record, I argued as strongly as I could to use the LPPL,
but they are hung up on trying to control their filenames.  Sigh.)

Considering that AMS probably own all
the code in the package,

They do.

is this an acceptable way of dealing with the situation?

It's certainly suboptimal, but I think it would be a terrible
overreaction to exclude amslatex just because of that.  Let's hope they
fix all their files soon.

Best,
k...@gnu.org


___
gNewSense-dev mailing list
gNewSense-dev@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-dev

Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Bug logging in under X

[Sam Geeraerts]

Richard Stallman schreef:

If I log in under X, then switch to a terminal to do work while
the login proceeds, X sometimes crashes.  When that happens, a new
copy of X starts on terminal 8, and terminal 7 remains hosed.

I do not know how reproducible this is -- it is rather a pain to try
to find out.


I've just done some testing on my yeeloong as well as on my i386 laptop. 
I've been able to reproduce something similar on both. However, it only 
happened when logging out, not when logging in, so I'm not sure if it's 
the same issue.


It sometimes happens when I do the following:
1) Boot laptop.
2) Log in with GDM.
3) Log back out of Gnome.
4) Right after I click the button to log out, start switching back and 
forth between terminal 1 and terminal 7 like crazy.


Result: terminal 7 stays black and GDM is at terminal 9 (never at 
terminal 8). Repeating steps 2-4 on terminal 9 has about the same chance 
of terminal 9 staying black and GDM appearing on terminal 10 (I've had 
it reappear on terminal 7 once). I've not been able to reproduce it on 
terminal 10 (GDM always comes back to terminal 10).



___
gNewSense-dev mailing list
gNewSense-dev@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-dev