just load in vi (vim) and
:set fileformat=unix
and write it back out.
Plus, you probably have a program called dos2unix installed...
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Les Mikesell wrote:
Gene Heskett wrote:
I'm trying to convert a test file, src code for a legacy computer,
whose eol is a single cr into one with a newline subbed for each cr,
and tr is being a pita, it broken, or there is PEBKAC.
If I use this syntax:
tr -c \r \n filename2
The
|'s or
<>'s. Using cat with a pipe is a waste of a process, though. tr can
read it's own input just as well with
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
I suppose you get used to using cat when there are multiple input files
that you want to combine.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
7;t use them the shell will parse and remove the \
characters (treating them as quotes for the following character in its
own parsing). These details are the same for every command you type (or
script) and not repeated in every man page.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mai
ariable and wildcard substitions, i/o redirection,
quote processing and a few other things. And it helps to know that when
looking at any other program's man page.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
ier to use some scheme involving rsync to another hard drive,
perhaps external or remote. If you have multiple machines, backuppc
(http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/) is particularly good.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To uns
cables for your nostalgia?
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
;t_boot_from_CD
Or, if the PC will boot from a USB flash device you can put the boot
image on that (but if it won't boot from CD you are probably out of luck
there too).
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://ww
a webserver, so perhaps I should go for a smaller distro.
There are other floppy boot loaders around that you could try, but I'd
recommend Centos 3.x as a better match for the machine. It should have
a floppy boot image and security/bugfix updates are still continuing.
--
Les Mikesell
rt-forwarding and run the apps locally. If you
really have to run an app on the intermediate machine, mount your drive
into it with NFS or samba - but since you mentioned it being slow, you
probably won't like that.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fe
ven if the people do manage to coordinate this.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
pment model in recent 2.6 kernel releases. Discussions on the
reason for the change are outlined in many places including
http://lwn.net/Articles/94386/
Do you also happen to have a link for Red Hat's position on this problem
or a description of how they deal with it in an enterprise
llows scripts to be run, which can do
whatever you want.
Have it email message to your cell phone or an sms gateway to it. That
would be especially annoying if you have to pay to receive them.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsub
rceptive description of the confusion of
GPL restrictions with freedom here:
http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/07/08/1832255&from=rss.
--
Les Mikesell (who likes his tivo...)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
no such relationship and
they run just fine when built on *bsd or commercial unix C libraries -
as they were before glib existed.
It would make more sense to describe a lot of things as the "GNU
re-implementation of..." rather than to imply that they were created as
original desig
process of
creating redistributable software? Or at least focus the credit on gcc
which has been something of a driving force because the alternatives
were expensive.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
call it OpenSolaris, and leave politics out of it.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
an operating system by itself?
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
society is
the lack of the things the restrictions prevent - at no gain to anyone.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
s known as such for several years before Linux was even conceived
of.
I didn't mean the word GNU. Reflexive acronyms are easy but useless.
What was the working system before Linux?
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To uns
distribution.
But it is equally ridiculous either way, when 80+% is neither GNU nor
Linux code. Calling it an xwindow system would make more sense. Or
perhaps a firefox/thunderbird/openoffice.org system - with most of the
other parts interchangeable.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Gordon Messmer wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
I didn't mean the word GNU. Reflexive acronyms are easy but useless.
What was the working system before Linux?
It was GNU. GNU, as a system, pre-dates Linux.
As a system of what?
GNU was not built on top of Linux. Linux was eventually ab
ribute them all together, but the operating
system underneath is still MS-Windows. Why should a different
criterium be applied to GNU+Linux?
The 'operating system' is Linux. The other components are mostly not
operating system specific.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fe
.
I'm not the one trying to dictate the name used for other people's
software. I think it is wrong.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
ks under a
compatible license which does not restrict the rights of the users to
whom you sell or distribute your software.
Again, the fact that under certain restricted conditions it may be
possible to reuse the code does not eliminate the damage caused by the
restrictions that prevent many other us
Gordon Messmer wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
Gordon Messmer wrote:
Close your eyes for a moment and picture a big red tag that reads:
$ COOPERATION
That's the GPL.
You seem to be implying that the GPL is necessary for cooperation.
You're not showing very good reading comprehen
best when strictly generic and
standards-compliant.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
ere designed to just use it.
Sendmail does go back even further, perhaps to the days when there were
dozens of computers on the internet - but without something more
interesting along with the ability to reuse the code it might have
stayed that way.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
eye
still doesn't make it a good thing.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
did.
The *bsd implementation made life easier for everyone who had enough
sense to use it. Starting from scratch was an academic exercise that
put everyone involved through hell - and still - the best it can do is
exhibit standard behavior.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedo
icense for some uses. But, if you go out
of business, the released GPL'd code is still stuck with the
restrictions that limit the ways it can be re-used.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
but greatly hampered acceptance and use
of this free code at precisely the time that Linux became available and
almost worked. You probably know the rest.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
possible - tcp/ip being both an example and something of an exception
in terms of subsequent openness.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
hen Windows95
came out. Of course after the court revelations about Microsoft's
anti-competitive practices, it wasn't so mysterious.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
make a backup copy of the file, then work on it. ;-)
The file you want to edit is normally sendmail.mc which is very simple,
and sendmail.cf will be rebuilt automatically when you restart the
sendmail service.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat
some code was
copied or some patented algorithms re-implemented, but so far no
specific case has been proven.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
I
figure web based would be next best.
If you want something seriously heavy-duty, look at
http://www.opennms.org. It's java based and their yum repo includes the
Sun JVM to run it.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To uns
ld only respect them more if
they were a part of the Free Software community.
If you stop thinking of free software as something that can't co-exist
with and be combined with non-free code (which really only applies to
GPL-encumbered code) the way things developed would make more sen
ot;the same low-level programming language usable all the
way from the guts of the kernel to applications, and a well-defined
system API available to that programming language" would be part of
the UNIX philosophy, and it wouldn't have a C library (and a C
compiler) as fundamental bui
way in the isolation the GPL demands while the rest of the world
cooperates and interoperates at the component level.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
else happens to that copy subsequently.
Long ago it might not have been completely predictable that many end
points of the longest-developed paths of unix development
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Unix_history-simple.svg) would be
open-sourced but it was never out of the question eith
ting redistribution unless requirements on
the 'work as a whole' are met makes this impossible in many cases,
especially at the kernel level where components like drivers and
filesystems become part of the 'whole'.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-lis
claim they aren't restricting the other parts.
The GPL would be more clear if it simply stated that you cannot
redistribute at all except under strictly limited conditions.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
talk to devices on the other, and if you don't need to
make modifications, there should be no issue with distributing a
standalone CDDL package in a mostly-gnu distribution. But, it does show
the potential for the problem.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list ma
claims SCO makes about jfs -
if a kernel component is a derivative of the kernel where it was
developed then things developed under other unix versions then ported to
linux may really belong to someone else.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list
h they disagreed with it being a good
idea. It's hard to search for things that far back but there must be
copies still around somewhere.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
egal counsel's understanding of the terms
as he stated them were both wrong?
You were told about the problems earlier on too and you choose to ignore
it. CDDL was deliberately designed to be incompatible with GPL
Deliberate? _Everything_ that is not the GPL is incompatible with the GPL.
--
inode0 wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 11:39 PM, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You were told about the problems earlier on too and you choose to ignore
it. CDDL was deliberately designed to be incompatible with GPL
Deliberate? _Everything_ that is not the GPL is incompatible wi
uld be millions and the end of FreeBSD.
Is that particularly different than SCO's claims against IBM/Linux? Or
the patents that Microsoft claims it holds that are used in Linux?
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubsc
local or remote (nfs/smb/ssh) drive. Then you can boot it in
the target and it will reconstruct the partitioning and filesystems as
well as the contents. It knows enough about most filesystems (including
windows) to only copy the used portions of the disk so it is very fast.
--
Les Mike
inode0 wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
inode0 wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 11:39 PM, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
You were told about the problems earlier on too and you choose to ignore
it. CDDL was deliberately de
time soon.
You haven't noticed the dismembered Bell's crawling back together to
resurrect the monster? Plus of, course devouring Cingular. (I'm not a
big fan of huge corporations...).
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
reboot? How come that would
still be Linux?
It wouldn't be Linux. It might be http://www.nexenta.org/os.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
icense that was really about freedom would have no reason for anyone
to need to circumvent it.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
at
http://www.vmware.com/appliances/directory/ that haven't properly
followed the strict GPL requirements to provide all the corresponding
sources.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
sufficient to make the source
available at the same time whether the recipient takes a copy or not.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
question about that, given the many examples of open
source code not under the GPL.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
ur own
goals is not the way to either freedom or making the world a better place.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
never exists by
itself and it doesn't make much sense to name it, although you might
need to talk about the kernel specifically or the complete distribution
as a whole.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://ww
acking off when packets were dropped due to
congestion?). Anyway it is the GPL that has kept them rich and in control.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
eedom.
No, I understand that restrictions are not freedom.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
BSD, NetBSD or OpenBSD, then I'd say "GNU-based distributions".
If you aren't distributing copies and thus having to pay attention to
the associated source distribution obligation imposed by the GNU/GPL
components there should be little reason to know or care about that
layer
be interested in,
and you wouldn't be so selfish as to wanting that kind of power only
to you, so there's some inconsistency in your stance.
None of which has anything to do with the outcomes that we can observe
for less restricted software - the original TCP/IP code being a fine
example.
like
apache, X, or my favorite, TCP/IP. When someone builds a proprietary
derivative it takes nothing away from the original and adds compatible,
choices. The more code is reused, the better for everyone regardless of
the circumstances of any particular branch.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED
f GPLv2 apply to all parts. Of course in the case of
pre-existing code already under a less restrictive license, the original
terms remain on the original package.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.c
this in custom code that is not redistributed. It's the
end users that aren't developers and can only afford things distributed
at mass market prices that lose any chance of benefits. They just never
even see it.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
f
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
I don't see how you can claim - or even think - what you've written here
if you followed any of what I've posted or any of the linked material,
but this thread is a mess so I'll start over. This time please don't
del
There is no twisting involved to point out that the 'work-as-a-whole'
clause of the GPL forces exactly its own terms on all components. If
you don't like to talk about that, so be it.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Gordon Messmer wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
Which was and is exactly my point. The GPL must cover the work as a
whole and thus is only compatible with licenses that permit their own
terms to be replaced with those of the GPL.
You're confusing the terms of the license. When you distrib
Gordon Messmer wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
Maybe that is because you are looking at it as a developer, and not
as an end user. It is the freedom of the end users that is being
preserved.
No, that is exactly backwards. Since the GPL only prohibits
redistribution
y case it would not
seem wise for any business to start a project knowing that they would
never be able to include components licensed from third parties under
any terms they might find agreeable.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsub
s incompatible with the
GPL."
This is a clear lie. There is no excuse for it.
On the contrary, the whole point of the GPL and its 'work-as-a-whole'
clause was to be incompatible with every other license. It is by
design and the lie is to claim otherwise. Please show how some
atics will jump in to point
out that it can't place restrictions on other code. Instead, say it
does not permit redistribution when other components are covered by
different terms. The effect is the same, though.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
to give unfair naming rights.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
is such a obvious ploy visible to
everyone. Now that I have shown to everyone watching the discussion what
a obvious troll you are, have a nice day ;-).
I'm not twisting anything. The GPL must apply to the work-as-a-whole.
That's not what I want it to mean. That's just what it
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jul 20, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
probably no one would bother to prove the lineage knowing that an
identical non-GPL'd copy existed.
And, even if one did, AFAIK the copyright over the code in question is
held solely by the part
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jul 21, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Björn Persson wrote:
I don't think I'll get everyone to agree on a definition. I don't
even think all the anti-GNU/Linux folks will agree on a definition.
I'm not sure there is an anti
end to
consistently choose one in detriment of the other.
Yes, that is unfortunate, but you have to live with it to promote FOSS.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
?
Because it makes it easy to move forward with many choices and never be
locked into any of them.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
haracterizations of it
http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/d5af1cc0012c3bec
And the FSF legal counsel said it was not a derivative work. See top of
page 16 here: http://www.linuxdevices.com/files/misc/asay-paper.pdf
Some people seem to think the story has changed recently, but I
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jul 20, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can't recall ever having any reason to
have a name for a subset of a distribution that only included the GNU
components and the kernel. Can someone who uses this term explain the
circumstances where i
aught the
experience of life with a monopoly perfectly:
"We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company"
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Björn Persson wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
I'm not sure there is an anti-GNU/Linux factor - just a pro "the other
85%" of the distro unwilling to give unfair naming rights.
Are you sure that there really are people who want to include those 85% in
GNU/Linux? I'm not. I h
e premises.
There's plenty of evidence for the choices that a non-restrictive code
base like the original TCP/IP implementation can produce, but no
equivalent for GPL restrictions.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
While I understand roughly the
scope of what GNU/Linux would encompass, there's really no such specific
distribution that I know of, and there wouldn't be much reason to use it
on its own unless you just like to live in emacs.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list ma
to day on this sort
of issue, even for some moderately large number of days.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jul 21, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
but it's a one way trip and that copy of such code no longer has its
original license terms.
Can you back this up? All the evidence I've got suggests the exact
opposi
rnel is
a special case since it typically encompasses the memory space of all
running programs. So, you need special rules to determine what is/isn't
derived.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
e along with many other things that are OSS. And the things that it
prevents by not also providing the freedom to be included with
proprietary works might have been as useful to everyone as TCP/IP.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
you have agreed not to distribute any of
it under other terms (per section 2b). It's not a matter of rights, it
is what you have agreed to.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
opted and
promoted by both movements.
No, its not a distraction. Its restrictions are one of the reasons such
a small percentage of software in use is FOSS.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
way. They both were involved in developing kernels
that were academically interesting for their time, but not generally
useful. Linus built something useful which is why it continues to get
attention.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
T
way in the first place.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
at you might then no longer have
the GPL permissions as to the whole. This concern was never clear to
me.
The point of that work-as-a-whole clause is to get you to agree to apply
restrictions to other people's work - and your own if you add any.
That's the reason the GPL is diffe
source at a reasonable cost of copying any
time for the following 3 years. For on-line distributions, making the
source available for download is normally considered sufficient.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https
NU and Free Software even exist.
On the contrary - it's more likely because if someone had tried to use
the GNU OS before Linux - or even the current Hurd version of GNU OS,
they'd run away screaming instead of trying it again...
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list maili
get them right away.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jul 22, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
the gnu utilities in linux distros could easily be replaced with
counterparts from the *bsd's, opensolaris, or any commercial unix
version. And the Linux kernel could be swapped with a bsd,
open
ack on the copyright notion of "derived work",
though, and instead choose different lines to draw, such as "library
interfaces" and "source files".
Even though they can't exactly force you to apply their terms to other
people's work, it is as close as
1 - 100 of 349 matches
Mail list logo
