Hello all, nice to see ya all again! ;)
Nothing with LEAF is or ever was GNU... search the archives (years ago) about
this discussion. Years ago I posted the SRC for Dachstein and Bering (libc)
as well as could possibly be done. A lot of the core was borrowed from other
developers on other syst
>From: "Eric Spakman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>"Under GPL version 2, distributors who release binaries through a
network
>server have to release the corresponding source code in the same way.
This
>requirement is the only way to assure that users can get the source, and
>the that it is the right source
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 13:20, David Douthitt wrote:
> Mike Noyes wrote:
> > Eric is correct. The GPL source code availability clause expires after
> > three years. Oxygen is exempt.
>
> I wasn't just talking about that; what about Mosquito? WISP? Dachstein?
> Bering?
David,
Mosquito isn't a LEAF
Mike Noyes wrote:
> David,
> Eric is correct. The GPL source code availability clause expires after
> three years. Oxygen is exempt.
I wasn't just talking about that; what about Mosquito? WISP? Dachstein?
Bering?
I suspect most or all fall into the three-year exemption
-
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 12:02, Eric Spakman wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> >My interpretation of Stallman's comments leads me to believe those
> >sources are considered up-stream. I hope I'm wrong.
> >
> >My interpretation: If you release binaries, you must maintain
> >source availability for th
Hi Mike,
>KP,
>My interpretation of Stallman's comments leads me to believe those
>sources are considered up-stream. I hope I'm wrong.
>
>My interpretation: If you release binaries, you must maintain
>source availability for three years. You may not rely on other
>projects
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 11:20, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 18. Juli 2006 19:38 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> > I can see the FSF argument though. How easy would it be to recreate any
> > of the Bering-uClibc releases in our SF FRS from 2004?
> >
> > https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?gro
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 20:20 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> it's possible. not as easy as today, cause we finished all buildtool setups
> later, but all sources (except shorewall, binutils, gcc, uclibc and kernel)
Since Shorewall has no binaries, it is exempt from this discussion. When
you rele
Am Dienstag, 18. Juli 2006 19:38 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 00:45, Luis.F.Correia wrote:
> > > From: Mike Noyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > We need to release source tarballs in the SF FRS with our binaries.
> >
> > Let's be reasonable about that, shall we?
>
> Luis,
> Fine for
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 08:45, Eric Spakman wrote:
> Op Di, 18 juli, 2006 5:25 pm schreef David Douthitt:
> > Mike Noyes wrote:
> >> We need to release source tarballs in the SF FRS with our binaries.
> >
> > How does this affect distributions that are not being actively
> > maintained?
>
> To answer
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 00:45, Luis.F.Correia wrote:
> > From: Mike Noyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > We need to release source tarballs in the SF FRS with our binaries.
>
> Let's be reasonable about that, shall we?
Luis,
Fine for now. The FSF hasn't contacted me or any of our other project
admi
Hi Mike,
Op Di, 18 juli, 2006 5:25 pm schreef David Douthitt:
> Mike Noyes wrote:
>
>
>> Everyone,
>> We need to release source tarballs in the SF FRS with our binaries.
>>
>
> How does this affect distributions that are not being actively
> maintained?
>
> I agree with Luis, though - the storage
Mike Noyes wrote:
> Everyone,
> We need to release source tarballs in the SF FRS with our binaries.
How does this affect distributions that are not being actively maintained?
I agree with Luis, though - the storage requirements for SF are going to
be incredible...
Hi!
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Noyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > The exceptions are (IIRC) the kernel.
>
> That is a problem then, and we need to address it.
I still say it is a non-existing problem, rather a stubborness.
> > Do the guys at sourceforge.net really want to impl
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 01:28, Luis.F.Correia wrote:
> I think that most of these upstream-downstream issues are not that relevant
> to Bering-uClibc, as we do provide the sources for all the packages.
Luis,
Agreed.
> The exceptions are (IIRC) the kernel.
That is a problem then, and we need to add
Hi!
WARNING - personal opinion inside!
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Noyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 4:39 PM
> To: leaf-devel
> Subject: Re: [leaf-devel] GNU Compliance (section 3) - are you
> compliant??
>
> On Fri, 2006-06
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 07:41, Mike Noyes wrote:
> That's the way I understood things also (linking to up-stream source was
> permissible when distributing unmodified binaries), but DSL and MEPIS
> were contacted by the FSF for doing exactly that.
>
> http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 07:49, Eric Spakman wrote:
> > http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/23/1728205&tid=150
> > This obligation is specified even more strongly in section 10 of
> > the draft for the third version of the GPL, which specifically states that
> > "downstream users" (thos
Mike
Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 07:23, Erich Titl wrote:
>> Mike Noyes wrote:
...
>>
>> If you provide software to download the source then the link it points
>> to _must_not_be_altered_.
>>
>> This is pretty sensible.
>
> Eric,
> That's the way I understood things also (linking
Hi Mike,
>>
>> If you provide software to download the source then the link it points
>> to _must_not_be_altered_.
>>
>> This is pretty sensible.
>>
>
> Eric,
> That's the way I understood things also (linking to up-stream source was
> permissible when distributing unmodified binaries), but DSL and
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 07:23, Erich Titl wrote:
> Mike Noyes wrote:
> > My understanding of the new enforcement is if you distribute you must
> > make source available. No more linking to up-stream source for
> > compliance, when distributing unmodified binaries. :-(
>
> I read the interview with S
Mike
Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 23:13, Cédric Schieli wrote:
>> A rapid scan of bering-uclibc src repo tells following apps have links to
>> other repos rather than a local copy :
>>
>> apps/automake (ftp.gnu.org)
>> apps/buildenv (ftp.gnu.org, ftp.gwdg.de, www.kernel.org)
>> apps/l
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 00:45, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> We better ask Sourceforge stuff if we (and probably more projetcs) can add
> the
> kernel sources for every version of the last three years to their servers - I
> guess they have to provide a seperate disk array for n copies of the kernel
>
On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 23:13, Cédric Schieli wrote:
> A rapid scan of bering-uclibc src repo tells following apps have links to
> other repos rather than a local copy :
>
> apps/automake (ftp.gnu.org)
> apps/buildenv (ftp.gnu.org, ftp.gwdg.de, www.kernel.org)
> apps/linux (www.de.kernel.org)
> apps
KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Freitag, 30. Juni 2006 08:13 schrieb Cédric Schieli:
..
>
> We better ask Sourceforge stuff if we (and probably more projetcs) can add
> the
> kernel sources for every version of the last three years to their servers - I
> guess they have to provide a seperate disk
Am Freitag, 30. Juni 2006 08:13 schrieb Cédric Schieli:
> Hello list,
>
>
> A rapid scan of bering-uclibc src repo tells following apps have links to
> other repos rather than a local copy :
>
> apps/automake (ftp.gnu.org)
> apps/buildenv (ftp.gnu.org, ftp.gwdg.de, www.kernel.org)
> apps/linux (www
Hello list,
A rapid scan of bering-uclibc src repo tells following apps have links to
other repos rather than a local copy :
apps/automake (ftp.gnu.org)
apps/buildenv (ftp.gnu.org, ftp.gwdg.de, www.kernel.org)
apps/linux (www.de.kernel.org)
apps/openssl (www.openssl.org)
apps/syslinux (www.kerne
On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 15:36, Eric Spakman wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 15:30, David Douthitt wrote:
> > According to the latest news, it is being reported that the FSF is
> > forcing all distributions to carry all source code, including "spinoff"
> > distributions. For example, that means that M
Hello David,
I'm not sure about other LEAF distributions, but the Bering-uClibc distro
has all sources, patches and config files of all programs in Sourceforge's
CVS. There may be a few ones linked from other sites, but they can be
added to CVS if needed.
But I do think that it may affect some ot
According to the latest news, it is being reported that the FSF is
forcing all distributions to carry all source code, including "spinoff"
distributions. For example, that means that MEPIS must carry the source
code to every program that they have released, not just those that they
have change
30 matches
Mail list logo
