Jean Louis wrote:
-@c Put in by rms. Don't remove.
-@cartouche
-@strong{Future Change Warning:} Proposed Federal censorship regulations
-may prohibit us from giving you information about the possibility of
-calling this function. We would be required to say that this is not an
-acceptable way
Arun Isaac wrote:
In general, I don't find it easy to find source code for package
"hello".
Don't know what you're talking about. It's very easy to get source code
for a package. For example,
$ guix build -S hello
While we are drifting off-topic for this list, perhaps a more
Jean Louis wrote:
[...]
Was it me who started split of the GNU project and presented it on
this GNU mailing list? Or was it you?
On a minor note, there seems to be some confusion here: the discussion
was started by "Andreas R. ", while you are
replying to "Andreas Enge " on this branch.
Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) wrote:
On 2021-03-25 18:57, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) wrote:
On 2021-03-24 19:55, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
[...] I now wonder if
we may be seeing a different angle of an attack on the GNU project
that RMS did not anticipate.
I also
Martin wrote:
In a perfect world if everything is reproducible than all the
compilations are deterministic. It means that for a given environment
your source code will always produce the same binaries. Briefly DDC
method is using mix of different environments in order to analyze the
binary
Jean Louis wrote:
* Jacob Bachmeyer [2021-04-03 05:17]:
Daniel Pocock wrote:
Its all in the last picture
Paul Tagliamonte, seconded the motion in Debian, with the co-founder of
Rebellion Defense and the top brass at the Pentagon.
https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds
Daniel Pocock wrote:
Another example below, it shows he is batting for his own side, during
business hours.
[...]
Forwarded Message
Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum and harrassement
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:53:57 -0400
From: Paul R. Tagliamonte
To: Steffen Möller
CC: Debian
Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 03/04/2021 13:55, Jean Louis wrote:
* Jacob Bachmeyer [2021-04-03 05:17]:
Daniel Pocock wrote:
Its all in the last picture
Paul Tagliamonte, seconded the motion in Debian, with the co-founder of
Rebellion Defense and the top brass at the Pentagon
Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 29/03/2021 12:59, Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 29/03/2021 02:49, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
Daniel Pocock wrote:
: host eggs.gnu.org[209.51.188.92] said: 550 bad domain -
email
sysad...@fsf.org for details (in reply to RCPT TO command)
: host eggs.gnu.org
Zany And Crazy wrote:
Porting something to the web is not only rewriting from >scratch in JavaScript
Isn't WebAssembly a way to make C++ code run in the browser? I thought
that's what it was.
The API available to WebAssembly code is radically different from the
API for native code,
Debian Community News Team wrote:
[...]
Looking at the headers of your message, we see that you sent it on 29
March and the gnu.org (FSF) mailing list only delivered it on 2 April
(headers copied below).
This shows that somebody in FSF is now checking the messages one by one.
No, it shows
Martin wrote:
On 3/30/21 9:10 AM, Jean Louis wrote:
* Martin [2021-03-30 11:07]:
Back in past, it was possible, and I remember doing so. I have been
using Jabber network and I could freely contact Google Plus users
through Jabber network and I could freely contact Facebook users
through
Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) wrote:
On 2021-03-24 19:55, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
Does there appear to be some form of hidden coordination behind these
articles?
As I understand, RMS always thought that proprietary software
companies would make some kind of large legal attack on the GNU
Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) wrote:
RMS didn't like "they" used as a singular, due to issues such
as a ambiguities of reference (is the antecedent the two people
mentioned, or just the latter?) He invented gender-neutral pronouns
and uses them. Those pronouns carry no indication of someone's
Akira Urushibata wrote:
Richard Stallman recently announced at LibrePlanet that he would
return to the FSF board. Soon after this announcement, many articles
appeared online stating strong objection to his return.
Does there appear to be some form of hidden coordination behind these
Jean Louis wrote:
* Jacob Bachmeyer [2021-04-03 22:16]:
On a side note: talk.google.com still speaks Jabber/XMPP on port 5223. I
use it to talk with friends that carry Android devices. The Android
messenger app and Hangouts still use Jabber on the backend.
How does the username
Daniel Pocock wrote:
Its all in the last picture
Paul Tagliamonte, seconded the motion in Debian, with the co-founder of
Rebellion Defense and the top brass at the Pentagon.
https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds-white-house-mob-ringleader/
I do not know where you are
Colby Russell wrote:
[...]
Consider this passage from The JavaScript Trap:
If the program is self-contained [...] you can copy it to a file on
your machine, modify it, and visit that file with a browser to run
it. But that is an unusual case.
In particular, consider the irony of
Colby Russell wrote:
On 3/15/21 9:02 PM, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
[...]
> One of the rationales presented to me (off-list) for this was that a
> WebAssembly port of GNU could be run as a web app and therefore be
> "always up-to-date"
Despite quoting the salient parts from
DJ Delorie wrote:
[...]
You are arguing that we should take away a technology from the user,
because some people use that technology in ways you disagree with.
However, other people use that same technology in other ways. It is not
the technology that is evil, it's how it's used that may be
Jean Louis wrote:
[...]
Question is rather if software is free or if one need proprietary programs
to run it in WebAssembly.
If there is nothing proprietary, we shall encourage creation of software
as WebAssembly is there because some people find it useful, we encourage
creation of free
Taylan Kammer wrote:
On 06.03.2021 22:30, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
In times like that, I wish I had quick
access to some Unix-like environment with helpful tools like netcat and
nmap on the client's end.
If I could just open a browser on the client's PC and visit a website
that boots up a GNU
Jean Louis wrote:
* Jacob Bachmeyer [2021-03-16 10:30]:
3. Web apps stored on "the cloud" are bad because they often do not
respect the user's freedoms, as even if the software is under Free license
terms, technical issues can make running a modified version difficult or
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
2. Browsers do not offer POSIX API to JS/WebAssembly for very good
reasons.
The other issue is that it wouldn't really be an operating system, if
it runs in a web browser. Which kinda is the whol point of the GNU
project. :-)
The GNU project also
Florian Weimer wrote:
* Jean Louis:
MongoDB modifies AGPL to this:
If you make the functionality of the Program, or a modified version
available to third parties as a service, you must make the Service
Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge,
under the terms of
Jean Louis wrote:
* Jacob Bachmeyer [2021-03-17 05:16]:
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
2. Browsers do not offer POSIX API to JS/WebAssembly for very
goodreasons.
The other issue is that it wouldn't really be an operating system, if
it runs in a web browser. Which kinda
Taylan Kammer wrote:
On 06.03.2021 17:45, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
I had a suggestion about all the GNU software on your site - since
WebAssembly is now a reality, maybe you guys should get to making
the browser versions of LL your software? :)
WebAssembly, and Javascript
Martin wrote:
On 4/4/21 11:38 PM, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
Martin wrote:
In a perfect world if everything is reproducible than all the
compilations are deterministic. It means that for a given
environment your source code will always produce the same binaries.
Briefly DDC method is using mix
Akira Urushibata wrote:
A ruling relevant to free software was recently made by a judge
presiding over the highly publicized trial of Kyle Rittenhouse
in Kenosha, Wisconsin, US.
On the night of August 25 2020, Kyle Rittenhouse shot three men with
a rifle in Kenosha, Wisconsin during heated
dick wrote:
There are so many other documented examples of abuses...
Again, "freedom" is the wrong word. Your ability to disengage and revert to
agrarian asceticism is orthogonal to the perfidy of nonfree software providers.
You do understand that the Free Software movement holds a
dick wrote:
Can nonfree refrain from failing to respect user's freedoms?
You present this as an unattributed quote. If this is intended to
represent my previous response, it is a dishonest paraphrase. As a
direct question, it is a tautology: nonfree software is "nonfree"
*because*
dick wrote:
Got it. Companies aren't upfront about their motives.
Got it. Companies maneuver to eliminate competitors, free or otherwise.
Heaven forbid capitalist entities should resort to that kind of unconscionable
gamesmanship. Dale Carnegie, you've been put on notice. In the meantime,
dick wrote:
Ah, looking at the sparse and indelicate correspondence here, I guess this is
where all the crazies go to shout into the ether.
I will try my best to assume that your message was written in good faith
and ignorance in writing this reply.
*Gratis* and *libre* are the best
Jean Louis wrote:
* Akira Urushibata [2022-02-22 02:23]:
[...]
So I can see that Linus is giving credits to GNU, GCC, Richard
Stallman, and that he did not know nothing about free software before
he heard Stallman's speech in Helsinki.
Linux kernel was at that time proprietary.
He
Akira Urushibata wrote:
Linux is not "operating system", but kernel.
I think that most, if not all, list subscribers are aware of that.
[...]
GNU system existed before the kernel Linux, and once somebody put
GNU with any kernel, it is GNU system based on Linux kernel.
We have
Taylan Kammer wrote:
I genuinely care about sexism. The commonly recognized kind, that targets
women.
The fundamental problem here is that all of the issues these CoC
documents are supposed to address are entirely off-topic and
inappropriate in a software development context. Sexism,
Adam Spiers wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 at 05:40, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
The fundamental problem here is that all of the issues these CoC
documents are supposed to address are entirely off-topic and
inappropriate in a software development context. Sexism, racism,
whatever-ism-of-the-day
37 matches
Mail list logo
