Slashdot Mirror


Mandrake Blocked By XFree86 4.4 License

Linzer writes "A mailing-list message posted by Mandrake Linux's main developer on the Cooker mailing-list states that the development version of the distro is about to revert from XFree86 4.4 to the 4.3 version because of XFree86's recent license change. Mandrake contributors have started asking for justifications from MdkSoft. Many point out features of XF86 4.4 [an 'an open source X11-based desktop infrastructure'] they can't live without, including support for some not so uncommon hardware. A later Cooker mailing-list post extends a bit on the reasons."

13 of 647 comments (clear)

  1. Time to find an alternative. by jsrlepage · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes, I know, XFree was, and still is, THE X11 free implementation for a Linux graphical subsystem. YES, it is by far one of the most advanced overall. But NO, there is NOT only this one.

    This implementation is the one we've been using for Linux Ages. But since recently, they have failed to deliver a greater-than-the-previous product: no extraordinary boosts, no rewrite of the starting system, etc... It's beginning to grow too old - we can see that by the starting greed of the project over its programmers.

    What we need is a new subsystem, like Xouvert or freedesktop.org's X Server implementation.

    --
    This is my opinion. Everyone has a right to my opinion.
  2. Re:I don't understand by Dogers · · Score: 5, Informative

    Laymans terms, probably misunderstood:
    They have an incredible mishmash of licenses between each source file, as each file can contain a message stating what license it is released under.
    Theyve just created another which encompasses the binary distribution.
    The whole binary distribution.
    Except the portions which had seperate licenses as specified by the source code.
    But to check which those bits are, you would have to check each source file, and know what it does.

    So I guess Mandrake have decided, probably in these exact words "F*CK THAT!"

    --
    I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
  3. XFree86 is a licensing mess. by breser · · Score: 5, Informative
    It's become clear after Branden Robinson did an audit of licensing in XFree86 that there are problems even outside of this license change.

    You can read his analysis on a thread on debian-legal.

    There's also been extensive discussion of the new license on debian-legal. The discussion carries over from Jan into February too.

  4. Re:Why does Mandrake have a problem with this? by rsidd · · Score: 5, Informative

    Didn't you follow the link? For those who didn't: (1) Including the new text in every place it "should" go is a lot of work, for so late in the release cycle; (2) the new XFree86 licence is likely not GPL-compatible, which causes huge problems for all distributors, not just Mandrake.

  5. Re:Why does Mandrake have a problem with this? by Namaseit · · Score: 5, Informative

    Read the license again! There is a no advertising without written permission clause. This is incompatible with the GPL *and* the amount of work it would take to get written consent from *every* developer to put "has XFree86 4.4" on a box or on a webpage is so much a pain in the ass it's quite insane that they even added that clause.

    --
    75% of all statistics are made up!
  6. Re:Please explain by po8 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The short version: the GPL is "incompatible" with licenses that require you to include extra text and restrict all other advertising. Thus, you cannot legally include both GPL'ed code and New XFree86 licensed code in the same program.

  7. Re:License change is perfectly reasonable by Namaseit · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's *written* consent from all authors. It's just like the old BSD license when it had the advertising license where you had to list all contributors of a project if you advertised the software. Meaning if you had 1000 developers for a project that would easily fill an entire page in a magazine. Making the 20k dollars you just spent on a magazine ad a big list of names no one cares about. XFree86 has done this now too and made it a little bit worse too.

    --
    75% of all statistics are made up!
  8. Also... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I find this paragraph specially interesting:

    If you notice the defensive post by Alan Cox that he's asking them not to
    change the license on his contributions, there's something wrong with it in
    the sense that it doesn't appear as "free" software anymore (free as in
    libre). (Not that they could, since Alan owns what he wrote of course)


    This kind of action only adds to the licensing mess xfree86 currently is. Working with the xfree86 devlopment team is becoming harder and harder.

    I can see why some mandrake users are pissed about this, but in the end it'll be better for everyone.

  9. Re:Quibble's and bits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Can someone give me a rational explanation as to why the GPL is so problematic in this area?

    Sure. Because by requiring your program to list contributors, you're limiting the ability to use or modify the program as you see fit.

    Imagine I had an OS program that required you to list 1,000 contributors each time it was run, divided by group, sorted alphabetically, blah blah blah. Now you're required to fill a user's screen with 1,000 names they'll never read, and you are unable to get around this requirement, short of writing your own program from scratch. What a waste of previously good OS code.

  10. Re:Only mandrake? by forlornhope · · Score: 5, Informative

    It wont be for long. I assume from the discussions on debian-legal and the fact that debian is still chewing on xfree86 4.3, xfree86 4.4 wont ever be packaged for debian.

    In my opinion this is a bigger problem for xfree86 than it is for debian. The reason being quite simple. By the time debian is ready for a new version of X11 the fdo xserver will be ready.

    Where xfree86 is losing big is that debian is the one that does all the porting to non-i386 and to a degree non-ppc archs. Xfree86 is losing this service because debian will most likely not be packaging version 4.4 and that will result in xfree86 going down hill because debian along with many other developers that are outside xfree86 proper do a lot for xfree86.

    Basically what Im saying is that the fdo xserver just got a huge boost in that there will be a lot of former xfree86 developers looking for a new project and as someone who activly uses the fdo xserver, it seems to be the best.

    --
    "We Don't Need No Truthless Heros!" - Project 86
  11. Re:Wither X? by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 5, Informative

    Your core confusion comes from confusing what X Windows is, possibly as a result of using Microsoft Windows. Windows does a great deal to blur the lines between the graphics display layer and the widgets on top.

    X Windows is (to simplify a bit) just a way to display bits on screen. Exactly what you display is left as a problem for the next layer up. This might seem odd, but it has great benefits. This means that the user interface layer (often Gnome or KDE these days) can engage in rapid change and development while the base layer (X) can sit nice and stable. Conversely, because particular widget sets and other user interface details aren't embedded into the graphics system I can pick from competing offerings.

    XFree86 is mostly stable because it works fine. There have been some important developments recently (XRender, XRandR, XVideo), but on the whole we've got what we need. The user visible improvements should take place on a higher level (Gnome, KDE, etc). Those higher levels can take advantage of the stable base X provides. All that's needed are regular driver updates for new hardware as it comes out (and bug fixes as bugs become known). The X Windows standard itself is gloriously stable. It works fine, additional functionality can be (and is) provided through extensions. That stability is key to allowing higher levels in the system to experiment.

    The features you want sound like great ideas (although I notice that Microsoft Windows and MacOS doesn't support the snapshot and migration functionality you want either). But they're ideas for different layers. Complaining that X should provide them is like complaining that your dashboard should provide better traction.

  12. OpenBSD not accepting License change either by mcroot · · Score: 5, Informative

    From: Theo de Raadt

    Like other projects, we will not be incorporating new code from David
    Dawes into the XFree86 codebase used in OpenBSD. All such changes
    have to be skipped, rewritten, or you can contact the XFree86 group
    and place your own efforts to repair this damage.

    the message continues.. but I think you get the point. Check the mailing list archives for the entire message

  13. Re:Good for them by molnarcs · · Score: 5, Informative
    Well, I believe only good will come of this. I found this link to a freedesktop.org discussion regarding the licecing changes following the discussion on the manrake list. The message is heart warming:
    Hi Donnie,

    We currently have no plans to ship XFree86 4.4.0 in the future.
    Red Hat is a strong supporter of open source software and
    technologies, and the new XFree86 license seems to be intended to
    restricting existing freedom for no real world technical or other
    gains. At least no gains that are beneficial to the community.

    Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation has expressed
    his concerns publically about the new XFree86 license and it's
    incompatibility with the GPL. Many others in the community
    object strongly to the new license as well.

    Branden Robinson of the Debian project has put together a list of
    license related issues contained in XFree86's source tree, and
    efforts are underway to remove code which is considered to be
    non-open source, or under too restrictive of license terms.

    Our current plan, is to use the freedesktop.org xlibs for the
    client side libraries. For the clients, utilities, X server, and
    other bits, we have not yet made a 100% solid decision, however
    a couple of alternatives are being explored. The details are
    not yet completely decided, however one thing that is decided, is
    that the XFree86 license version 1.1 is unacceptable.

    X11 has sorely lacked such an open and collaborative development
    environment for a very long time. It's now time for the open
    source community to unite and work together on solving this
    problem together, and give X11 permanently back to the community!

    I very much look forward to working together in collaboration
    with yourself, the Debian project, FreeBSD, Mandrake, SuSE, X.org
    foundation, the other BSDs, and any/all other interested parties
    on a true open source solution for the needs of X11 users and
    developers.

    Take care!
    TTYL