Slashdot Mirror

I don't think this is correct. Since you can already take the code and stick it into whatever you want, proprietary or otherwise, there is no reason whatsoever that you could not redistribute it under the GPL. You're not changing the copyright; you're just adding licensing terms, which the BSD license allows you to do.

The biggest obstacle in the past was the advertising clause, but even that is being removed now.

As for why some people think this would be a good idea, this is my guess:

People have many theories as to why Linux has achieved the popularity among users and companies that it has. Usually among these theories is the idea that volunteer programmers are more likely to contribute to a project that forbids the proprietarization of their code than to one that does not. This may or may not be true; it's a tough one to prove.

So, if you buy that theory, the thought goes...by going to the GPL, BSD would lose some hackers (the hard-core BSDL advocates), but pick up more in return. Of course, it's just that a theory, and an untested one at that. I don't really know that things would work out that way. A reasonable counter argument is that there are only so many hackers of the GPL persuasion, and Linux is already using those resources.

My guess is that with the removal of the advertising clause, someone is going to try to start a GPL BSD project. That will be the true test; we'll just see how many developers they pick up, and whether developers are lost from Linux, the BSDs, or neither.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Neither of them fit very well to describe what is happening in the free software world. It's sharing, and voluntary, so it's really its own thing.

It's not even really anarchist, as there is a legal structure (copyright) that enforces what you can and cannot do with source code.

Sort of libertarian or communitarian, maybe. The important point is that it's voluntary, at the individual level.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

That's a heck of a weird theory. On a single-user system, *everything* runs as root.

I've used WebStar and Pictorius before on a Mac (prefer the latter, myself), and it's not half bad as a web server, but I wouldn't put anything stressful on 'em, as I'd be afraid of stability problems.

Remember, Apple was the last big OS vendor to fix the ping-o-death problem (took 'em until MacOS 8).

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

XFMail has support for it now (well, a recent version, and everything should be current soon). Please consult http://xfmail.slappy.org for more info. :)

I never expected such quick service from Rob. *big grin*

Anyhow, the above comment is exactly what I was hoping would happen.

The people who were a bit hesitant about the idea yesterday have a very good point: you should use keyservers. I have had my keys up on keyservers for some time.

But I still think that having a Public Key display on Slashdot is a useful thing, and am glad Rob thought so, too, if only for further publicity of PGP and GnuPG.

Thanks, Rob!

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Really? That's strange. I have been reading/posting to Slashdot since late 1997/early 1998, have a high Karma, read what I think would be an average amount, but have never moderated. Once, I had moderator status, but then Slashdot crashed, and when it came back up, my points were gone.

Hmmm....I wonder if my account is broken somehow.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Linus' views on microkernels are, of course, well known. I think he's right, to a point, and in the context of where computing is today. Projects like the Workplace OS, ambitious as they were, I think reflected the hopes of many of where the microkernel could take us (I certainly was all caught up in the hype for the project at the time). Perhaps they still will. I can only dream.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

• Linux is not the solution to every computing problem
• Research into new operating systems needs to continue, and perhaps be accelerated

You even used the example of eCos, an open source RTOS for embedded systems.

It's certainly an arguable point, as many, many people still support the proprietary software model. Even open source advocates support it for certain applications. But to suggest that open source is a model that should be followed, in the interest of consumer and developer alike, is at least a legitimate view, whether one agrees with it or not.

BTW, I found your comments about the Workplace OS of great interest, as I had not heard about that particular event (Microsoft hiring away an important developer) before. Do you know where I can read more about that?

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

This seems to be a rapidly increasing problem. I've only noticed it over the past month or so, but many comments are now being moderated down because the moderator disagrees with the ideas expressed in the post. See this post from today. Not mine; just a post I happened to see. Was it off topic? Certainly no more than its parent post, which was not moderated.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Agreed. Although I think that it (a GPL or BSD release) would still achieve their prime objective here, which is to do damage to Microsoft's primary revenue stream.

But I would like to see them give up control on the distribution side of things, while perhaps retaining some control on the modification side.

That's really the only beef I have with the current plan; it doesn't accomplish Sun's (apparent) goals, because it will not achieve sufficient distribution if people have to download StarOffice seperately.

A QPL-type license would get the job done.

-- Posting this with Sun StarOffice, BTW! Not a half bad browser, if you have the RAM. I don't even think it leaks memory nearly as bad as Netscape.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

If that's correct, then going truly open source with StarOffice is clearly the right thing to do. It would mean that StarOffice would be distributed with pretty much every Linux CD. It would also mean that their would be numerous distribution points, instead of one.

Truly open-sourcing StarOffice would be a punch to Bill Gates' gut. As it is, the SCSL release will be little more than a slap to his face.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

I fondly recall those days (not all *that* long ago) when Slashdot (almost) resembled 80's Usenet. Clued-in folks knowlegeably discussing the stuff they're interested in.

I would note, however, that many who are here now would see threads like the one you pointed us to as representative of a banal Linux admiration society. Perhaps. But it was a lot more fun then than it is now. I'm still here, so it's still fun, interesting, valuable, etc. It's just that it used to be moreso.

There wasn't much bickering in those days; I think that's what I miss most. But there was still lots of valuable content.

I realize that banning ACs wouldn't make things back the way they were. I don't know that there is an answer. Once something has become as popular as Slashdot is, I'm afraid there's no hope in preserving/restoring its contributors' high quality.

I still wonder if separating comments by user agent and/or OS might not keep some of the sniping down. But, then you'd miss out on good comments by people who are on different platforms than yourself. Maybe if only comments of 2 or better broke the "platform barrier?" Hmmm...

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Actually, if you look at his User Info, you will see that he starts off with a 2, like all other "good karma" posters.

There may a certain amount of moderator worship for him, but I did see one of his posts moderated down once (and left that way) to a 1, as "flamebait."

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

OK...I realize that you may be trolling me, but, given that you have what appears to many to be a legitimate beef, I will address it.

I have seen this complaint posted over and over and over and over, and every time I ask for evidence of such behavior, it is met with deafening silence.

Why don't we take a gamble, and actually look at some evidence?

You gave the example of BSD vs. GPL licensing; let's look at the most two recent threads involving BSD:

The most recent was: Berkeley removes Licensing Clause.

In this thread, contrary to your claims, the highest rated comments are neither pro- or anti- either license (at least not strongly.

Lower down in the thread, we see a post that was moderated down which celebrates the license change and suggests GPLing BSD. It was borderline; it didn't really have any content, so I think it was properly moderated.

On the other hand, Brett Glass (or an AC posting as him) went on a trollfest, starting with an attack on the FSF. Not one of his anti-GPL ravings (which included red-baiting) was moderated down.

In the next most recent thread, Clearing up FreeBSD confusion, which, if it were a post rather than an article, would qualify as borderline flamebait, the most highly rated comment, Try it, then decide for yourself...I know I will is mildly anti-Linux (at least anti-Linux-user).

In summary, the most recent evidence contridicts your claims, and shows that anti-Linux comments are indeed being moderated up, not down.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Really, this bogus "blame everything on Linux users" thing is really grating on the nerves.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

It's apparently the "hip" thing to bash on Linux and Linux users now, and the trolling is just a part of this.

The only real solution is to eliminate AC posting once and for all.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

I, for one, don't have any particular axe to grind. I like the BSD license, but I generally prefer the GPL license, because it discourages forking and keeps source code open.

BSD license is more favorable (at least under certain circumstances) to software developers. GPL license is more favorable to software users.

Pick the one you like. If something is released under a license/policy you don't like, don't use it. That's what I do, and is why I generally avoid closed-source software.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

It's spelled G-P-L. Please grow up.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Apples and oranges. Netscape release a pile of largely useless source code, which wouldn't even compile. It is only now, over a year later, that it is even beginning to approach some semblance of usability. That is not the kind of project that is likely to attract developers or users.

StarOffice, on the other hand, is already pretty solid, and Sun probably wouldn't need to remove much code before releasing the source code.

My point is that since they're releasing under the SCSL, they're basically conceding that they're not going to make money from StarOffice. So, since they've already decided that, they might as well go ahead and Open Source(tm) it, to gain the additional benefit of wide distribution.

There's just no point in doing it half way.

Either way, I've (actually my company) already paid for my copy of StarOffice, so it's not going to affect me personally.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

That's very disappointing; I was afraid there was some commercial distribution catch. I understand that Sun wants to recoup their investment, but...

If they stick to this type of licensing, StarOffice will remain a relatively insignificant piece of software. If they Open Source(tm) it, it could change the face of desktop computing, and could generate more hardware sales for Sun than they can ever hope to make from distribution fees.

I really hope ESR and Bruce Perens can have a chat with Sun, and talk some sense into them.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Indeed they would. However, we need to look at what is tying the users to Windows: it is largely Microsoft Office (yes, games are important, but individual games have significantly less staying power than Office, and are presumably not used heavily in offices).

If RedHat, Caldera, and the rest (apart from Corel, naturally) bundle StarOffice (I don't know if RedHat or Debian's policies allow this, given the SCSL), you suddenly have a relatively easy to use office platform that has software licensing fess of $0. Windows is no longer a "must have" under circumstances like this.

So, let's see: Microsoft's solution for a 20-seat office is, oh, $5000 (at least; that's assuming no NT server, no Exchange, etc.). This, combined with Linux, costs roughly $0. Gee, tough decision, especially given StarOffice's compatibility with Microsoft Office file formats, and relative operational similarity (read: trivial training costs).

This is IE vs. Netscape all over again, except the revenue is larger, and it's happening to Microsoft this time.

C'mon, you must know as well as I do, that IS people all over the world are just looking for an excuse to introduce Linux on the desktop. They're tired of having to deal with Microsoft's crap, and are just bored with it all. This gives them a solid piece of ammunition that they can use to argue for Linux/UNIX on the desktop.

This in itself might not accomplish that, but a very large piece of the puzzle just got put into place.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Even though it might not do exactly what we want it to do, let's look at what it may otherwise accomplish.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAICT, the license does allow you to use the product, even commercially, free of charge (as long as you don't use more than 500 copies, if the picoJava rules apply to this).

In the past, StarOffice was free to use for non-commercial use, but you had to pay if you wanted to use it legitimately for work (my company bought it for me, $169, not bad, really). This meant that there was insufficient incentive to migrate from Microsoft Office.

Free, however, is a nice price...especially when you have 10, 20, 100 people using Office. This could definitely put the hurt on Microsoft by "cutting off their air supply," since Office is their cash cow.

Normally, this would be a bad thing; however, right now, with the desktop monopoly Microsoft holds, anything that reintroduces competition into the desktop market is a Good Thing, IMO.

Perhaps Microsoft will now get a taste of what they did to Netscape.

Maybe in a few years, AOL will buy them, too. He he he.

I'd still like to see Sun reconsider, and offer StarOffice under a GPL-, X11-, or MPL/QPL-type license.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

1. Linux
2. Exim
3. ProFTPd
4. KDE (A number of KDE programs could make up this whole list, actually, if you want to get picky about what is and isn't "enduser software.")
5. XEmacs
6. ncftp
7. MiniVend
8. PHP
9. GNUTar
10. samba

And, because all this stuff is GPLd, I can hack on it, or ask others to hack on it for me. And I need not worry about someone else's "business decision" orphaning my software (happened to me with OS/2; not gonna happen again because I refuse to chain myself to proprietary software when free alternatives exist).

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Now, there are many complicated reasons for this, but what I am trying to say is that the number of people who have a big problem with the GPL is relatively small. Most would be developers who wish to use others' work in their own proprietary work.

You may define freedom as including the ability to restrict the freedom of others, but not everyone does.

I use software that is GPLd, BSDd, X11d, and proprietary. I even am currently maintaining a program that has a (ugh) non-commercial-distribution license. But, I prefer the GPL, whereever suitable, because it discourages forking, and keeps software free. And quite a number of people seem to think they can make money from GPLd software, regardless of the views of a few rabid proprietary developer advocates.

I guess my view would agree with Linus'. If you didn't write the software, you have no right to bitch about the license.

But what it really boils down to is this: the user/customer will, in the end, determine what licensing schemes are successful. If the user prefers GPLd software, that is how things will tend to be licensed in the future. All the pissing and moaning in the world isn't going to change that reality.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

This makes me suspect that there is no actual Amiga product, after all, at least not in the forseeable future.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

*Microsoft* was unable to solve the problem. Their ultimate answer (after having a ticket open for six months) was that FoxPro is not designed for this kind of use!

No FUD. No bullshit. Just the facts. Microsoft software sucks.

I have *never* seen a UNIX or Linux box behave similarly.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Presumably, most of the people here have had to deal with NT (I certainly have), and they know what's good, stable and flexible, and what's not. That is not bias; it's experience.

Certainly, Astroturfers will want to paint it as bias, but it's no more biased than reporting the baseball scores. What is, is.

I know from personal experience that I can set up a Linux box, and apart from occasional updates, leave it be. I have never been able to do that with an NT box for more than a couple months at a time, and NT machines have this nasty habit of suddenly becoming flaky for no apparent reason, depending on load and the particular software/services you're running. And service packs are a crapshoot (remember NT4 SP2?).

So, it's a great article because it is confirming the experience of most of the people here who have actually used both Linux and NT to any significant extent.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

BTW, what happened to all the Astroturfers that were posting yesterday about how the Compaq decision was of little importance, because 64-bit NT Alpha development was going strong?

Whaddya think, everyone? Exit Cutler? Or is Merced going to keep him happy?

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Yup. Those Matchbox cars can be pricy these days.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Other involved parties:

• Microsoft
• People (namely IS managers) clueless enough to use Microsoft software
• People who habitutally send files through email, instead of using FTP

Now, I'm as excited about low-cost PPC boxes as anyone, but...fair is fair...

That's a feature of SCSI, not of CHRP or PPC.

Plug in a SCSI hard drive on a x86 box that has SCSI, and it's about the same. Let's not forget that new Macs (and Sun Ultra 5s and Ultra 10s -- insert Homer Simpson's girlish scream here) have IDE peripherals, along with all the baggage that entails.

And even then, who's to say that setting SCSI ID and termination jumpers is really easier than setting IDE Master/Slave jumpers?

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

No problem:

./configure
make
make install

commercial != proprietary

If it's proprietary (closed), I'm likely not all that interested anyhow.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

FWIW, I haven't had any major problems with hardware support in the 5 years I've been using Linux (only full-time in the last 1-1/2 years).

I use Linux at work on a P200; at home on a Celeron 300A (@450).

I have just now gotten my hands on a PowerMac and have LinuxPPC on it. I have to say: it has been mostly a pleasant experience (only problem is trying to run a custom kernel I built; it panics on boot. I'll figure it out, though). The machine is quite responsive, even though it's an older machine. It seems less jerky than an Intel box.

I'm definitely considering a PPC motherboard for my next box, if the price is right.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

anyway I hate the idea of linux which is usually a do it yourself thing having "problems" with anything (meaning it is basically broken except to Stephen Hawking or Albert Einstein).

Then, you say:

Proud Debian GNU/Linux Slink 2.1 (modified) user.

Huh?

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Someone said "now I don't have to code the GUI by hand." I just wanted to point out that there are already free tools available that help in that regard. There is QtEZ, a very basic GUI builder for Qt development, and KDevelop, a GUI buider and IDE for KDE.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Tried to use angle brackets. Arrgh.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

You *did* say that you were considering FreeBSD, didn't you? :-P

But seriously, running an operating system doesn't mean you have to be part of any particular group. You just use it, and get on with your life.

I just don't get it when people say, "I won't run , because advocates are jerks. In case you haven't noticed, advocates of all OSs are mostly jerks (probably including myself). So, by your standard, you'd have to go back to paper and pencil.

Who cares what people who advocate Linux say? Measure it by its usefulness, not by its advocates.

If you prefer Windows, that's fine. I'm certainly not going to tell you that it doesn't suit your needs; it just doesn't happen to suit mine. As others will no doubt point out, X has no interface, since it is a protocol. There are various interfaces that you can use via X, including GNOME, KDE, WindowMaker, fvwm, and, of course, twm. KDE 2.0, slated for early next year, will probably be the most advanced UNIX desktop environment to date. Check it out when it's released. In the meantime, save often. ;-)

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

I'm not sure why, but I never had to do that. make install took care of everything for me.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

This is what worked for me:

make xconfig
make bzImage
make modules
make install
make modules_install
xemacs /etc/lilo.conf&
lilo

YMMV. HTH. HAND.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

What I did was install Linux (many different times). When it got to the point where I found it more useful than OS/2 (around 2.0.29), I switched.

If it works for you great. If not, oh well. But, really, when it comes right down to it, who really cares what ESR, RMS, or anyone else has to say? (Don't get me wrong: I think they have interesting, valuable things to say; I just mean that their writings don't have much effect on your productivity.)

Put another way: I don't use Windows, not because of anything Gates or Ballmer have to say, but because it's a steaming pile of dog shit.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

That said, I will be switching to KOffice as soon as it is ready. Why? I just don't like using proprietary software. I will use it, if there is not a reasonable free substitute. But, my goal is to use all free software ASAP, for a number of reasons, including:

• Platform independence (try running StarOffice on linuxppc lately?)
• Multiple sources for bugfixes
• Extendability/Customizibility
• Sense of community
• License flexibility/ability to share
• Reasonable cost
• The draconian laws the proprietary software vendors are getting passed (see the WaR3Z d00d smack down story)

Good luck trying to sell it, as the breadth and scope of free software continues to expand. Perhaps if you do niche software; otherwise, you end up competing with either free software or Microsoft.

You see, it's not really up to you, the programmer. It's ultimately up to the user/customer. They're the ones that will decide what licensing terms they prefer. And if they choose free software, well, I suggest you find a way to make money from it.

You are operating under a false assumption; that the only way to make money from software is to collect a fee for shipping a binary. As we are finding out, that is not the only way to bring in income; in fact, it may not even be a viable way today; just ask Netscape.

There are people who are making money from free software, but they are not trying to do it under the traditional model. If they did, they would be doomed to failure.

You may find it difficult to make money in this market, but that's not really something that is under your control. Adapt or perish.

As someone else pointed out, shrinkwrap software accounts for something like 5% of all programming jobs anyhow.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

The reason I'm awake right now is because a flaky NT server stopped responding, and I got paged at 5:20 AM. Rrrr.

Have you considered that maybe, just maybe, NT *does* suck?

P.S. Thanks to VNC, I didn't have to drive downtown, and sit at the console to recover. Why didn't Microsoft think of that?

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

I would obviously recommend that this be somewhere in the Pacific Northwest. Humboldt County, California has a few very good breweries, and magnificent scenery with the Coast Redwoods.

Portland, Oregon supposedly has the highest per-capita concentration of breweries on the planet, and nearby there is Mt. Hood, the Columbia River Gorge, and many other very good hiking areas.

If Seattle is preferred, perhaps it could be a bike trip through the San Juan Islands. I don't know if there are many breweries up there, though.

Finally, across the Strait of Juan de Fuca (I just like to say that out loud), there is Victoria, B.C. on Vancouver Island. There are some good breweries, and many excellent pubs, and the island has many recreational opportunities.

I couldn't make it to Germany (although I would have liked to), but I could definitely attend a Beer Hike in any of these places.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Now, I'm a pretty big Linux advocate, but...

• There are free (or low-cost) licensing programs available for Solaris, UnixWare and SCO Open Desktop.
• Linux still has scalability shortcomings compared to these UNIX(tm) operating systems.
• It'd be my guess that most Solaris sysadmins also use (or at least) tinker with Linux and/or the free BSDs.

True, Linux and the free BSDs are not UNIX(tm), but Solaris is.

I have a hard time believing that SCO has a userbase five times as large as Solaris/Intel.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

I can tell you that in twenty years of reading about libertarianism, discussing the philosophy with others (worldwide) via FidoNet, Usenet, etc., that the mainstream usage of "libertarian" is indeed that of someone opposed to using coercion to achieve political goals. Certainly, the meaning differs around the world; outside the U.S., libertarians are less purist. The main difference I've seen is that "Euro-libertarians" don't care much for firearms, as most Europeans seem to be hoplophobic.

Socialism, by definition, involves the use of coercion. If it didn't, it wouldn't be socialism; it'd be charity. So, I maintain that a definition of libertarianism that includes any type of socialism is an oxymoron. Capitalism, or more accurately, the free market, *may* involve coercion, in the form of force or fraud. That is why libertarians are not anarchists; we believe that government must exist for the sole purpose of policing force or fraud.

Once you decide that the free market is the problem, and that some sort of governmental body must step in to achieve goals that the free market is not achieving, and use coercion towards those ends, you cease being a libertarian, and begin being a statist.

Y'know, "liberalism" doesn't mean what it once did either.

But I'm an American, so I'm obviously a dim-witted hick who doesn't possess your superior intellect. So, fine, I give up. "Believe what you wish," indeed.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

Capitalism is beside the point. If that's what you want to call organic economics, so be it. Libertarianism is quite obviously opposed to any form of coercion by government fiat. Any type of socialism is 100% in opposition to libertarian philosophy.

Ayn Rand, for your information, was never a libertarian, and was quite opposed to libertarianism. Her objectivist followers are harsh critics of libertarian philosophy to this day.

Having read quite a bit about the years leading up to WWI, and the (tragic) march towards statism and the 20th century, I am quite aware of "anarchist socialism" in the late 1800s/early 1900s. It may have been associated with the term "libertarian" at some point, but that was not, nor espcially is it now, a mainstream usage.

No, sir; it is you that have some reading to do.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

There are purely philosphical works like Narveson's, and lots of hybrid material like Hospers' and Machan's (all highly recommended reading for those who would like to *really* know what libertarianism is about). None advocate any degree of socialist control, under the guise of "anarchism."

The meaning of libertarian is pretty clear, and has been since at least the 1960s.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page

The aversion to the use of the term "Frisco" is a yuppie/upper class thing (Remember Herb Caen's book?). "Frisco" is A-OK among the blue collar/"Regular Guy" crowd.

--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page