Again, the reality is that none of this (the existence of some
products that
exist as binary modules) harm the community. They offer choices for users,
and the more choices the better. What a horrible place the world would be
without TiVo (who never would have done the work if they couldn't
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 2:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD Licence
Linus is just a big dope anyway, so who cares what he thinks
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Thomas
Sparrevohn
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 2:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD Licence
Importance: High
On Thursday 28 October 2004 22:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
I thought I sent that mail to chat@, I wonder how the reply ended up at
questions@ again. Unfortunately my provider won't let me set a Reply-To:
header.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/28/04 4:49:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think that Allot
In a message dated 10/29/04 5:27:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then you either know nothing about programming or nothing about their
products. Do you think they do gigabit bandwidth management, with
features not in the kernel, from user space?
That's not what I meant
In a message dated 10/29/04 2:10:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
the GPL. I seem to recall the discussion was about nVidia's closed
source, binary only drivers but, according to Linus, affects all similar
products. I'm unsure if and how this issue is being dealt with.
In a message dated 10/28/04 9:16:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But then, I'm not sure (and I mean it) if there can be any piece of
software which, if designed for e.g. Linux, can be written w/o using any
system headers, libraries or whatsoever.
--
I
In a message dated 10/29/04 2:12:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Linus is just a big dope anyway, so who cares what he thinks? He's like
Kerry. He thinks whatever is convenient for him to think at the time.
And RMS is a lot like Bush who says whatever is convenient for
In a message dated 10/29/04 12:38:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
The GPL and Linux don't care if you link into their system libraries,
they expect that which is why the system libraries are LGPLd
...
If I write a piece of code that uses a defined interface, it's
On Oct 29, 2004, at 1:10 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/29/04 12:38:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
The GPL and Linux don't care if you link into their system libraries,
they expect that which is why the system libraries are LGPLd
...
If I write a
In a message dated 10/29/04 3:54:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Its equally preposterous for the GPLers to claim that anything that
works
with any O/S is owned by the owner of the OS as a derivative work.
But
they do, and they will, because it suits them.
It is not
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 5:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD Licence
The FSF doesnt have standing with Linux so they can blow as hard
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 7:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD Licence
The GPL is a myth. It will never be tested because
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 12:15:17AM +0100, nbco wrote:
On Wednesday 27 October 2004 23:12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are people who have written custom GUI front ends for Linux stealing?
They're not stealing, they are getting paid for the value that
they've added. Are people that sell
In a message dated 10/28/04 4:49:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think that Allot modifies the Linux kernel. I wouldn't expect
them to do so and I don't see an obvious reason why they should (*).
Obviously some of their custom stuff needs to run inside kernel,
On Thursday 28 October 2004 22:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you please move the discussion to FreeBSD-chat - now
In a message dated 10/28/04 4:49:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think that Allot modifies the Linux kernel. I wouldn't expect
them to do
-Original Message-
From: Chuck Swiger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:14 AM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD Licence
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
[ ... ]
You might consider that opensource.org is NOT a BSD site
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 10:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD Licence
In a message dated 10/26/04 2:32:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time
-Original Message-
From: Danny MacMillan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 11:24 AM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: Graham Bentley; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD Licence
I will preface my reply with the following disclaimer: I am no
lawyer
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gert Cuykens
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD Licence
If you buy a product what would you want ? A pretty box or pretty
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
[ ... ]
You might consider that opensource.org is NOT a BSD site, it was
setup by Linux people not BSD people.
Sort of. The Open Source definition started from Debian guidelines about
free software. However, the OSI board has people from various organizations
besides
In a message dated 10/27/04 4:49:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is yet another example of the GPL license flaw. While any of the
copyright holders of the Linux kernel could sue Allot, if they don't,
it pretty much builds evidence that is going to help those that
In a message dated 10/27/04 12:59:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you buy a product what would you want ? A pretty box or pretty
software ? Finishing the product is just marketing and trying to make
a very pretty box to put the software in. When something is open
source
On Wednesday 27 October 2004 23:12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/27/04 12:59:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you buy a product what would you want ? A pretty box or pretty
software ? Finishing the product is just marketing and trying to
make a
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dennis Koegel
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 1:21 AM
To: Philipp Huber
Because Juniper, for example, are perfectly free to decide against
making their changes to the (in this case) FreeBSD code
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 11:32:04PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Because Juniper, for example [...]
You do realize, don't you, that the interesting part of a Juniper
is the microcode in their DSP routing engine. FreeBSD is only used
to control the routing engine in a Juniper router, it
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Graham Bentley
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 12:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: GPL vs BSD Licence
Hi List !
Perusing the Internet the other day I came across a short
interview with Linus
In a message dated 10/26/04 2:32:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually a more interesting example is some of the Linksys routers
do indeed use an embedded Linux along with Zebra as the routing engine.
Ted
Or Allot communications, who openly advertise the use of linux,
I will preface my reply with the following disclaimer: I am no
lawyer. However as it's clear that you're not either, it makes
little practical difference.
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 01:51:02AM -0600, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
...
What is ignored is that the GPL contains a loophole - it DOES
In a message dated 10/26/04 2:26:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Foundation, who is the copyright holder of the GPL license itself.
In fact, the FSF advises authors to transfer copyright rights of their
work to the FSF to avoid these problems.
Ah, so your point is that
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:50:16 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/26/04 2:26:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Foundation, who is the copyright holder of the GPL license itself.
In fact, the FSF advises authors to transfer copyright
Hi List !
Perusing the Internet the other day I came across a short
interview with Linus Torvalds from a while back. He was
asked about the GPL vs BSD Licence.
As I dont fully understand the development process I was
wondering if anyone could comment on his reply below?
I (mis?)interpret
But equally important is the ability to join back forks, when/if some
group finds the right solution to a problem. And that's where the
GPL comes in: you can really think of the whole license as nothing
more than a requirement to be able to re-join a forked project from
either side.
i
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 09:44:36AM +0200, Philipp Huber wrote:
But equally important is the ability to join back forks, when/if some
group finds the right solution to a problem. And that's where the
GPL comes in: you can really think of the whole license as nothing
more than a
In a message dated 10/25/04 4:21:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But equally important is the ability to join back forks, when/if some
group finds the right solution to a problem. And that's where the
GPL comes in: you can really think of the whole license as
Forgive my etiquete, please. Since I'm certainly not answering any
questions, I felt it appropriate to take this off of questions. Is that
good form, or have I put the proverbial foot in mouth?
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:47:14 -0400 (EDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/25/04
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:52:01 -0500, Vijay Kaul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Forgive my etiquete, please. Since I'm certainly not answering any
questions, I felt it appropriate to take this off of questions. Is
that good form, or have I put the proverbial foot in mouth?
Ha!!! And then, truly puting
37 matches
Mail list logo
