Normative references to the Linux device list, init.d, run-levels, rpm as packaging, a bunch of user and group names that serve no purpose on other systems, and so on.
Please go fool someone else into thinking you can make it work on BSD, there's a reason why BSD and System V differ, because they are different architectural paths.
There's a lot of numbers that were never allowed to be published with regard to Alpha and Superdome performance. The EV7 line of Alpha CPUs actually sold more than estimated and was picking up.
My experiences have been the total opposite of yours. The ANSIfied code in general is clearer, solved mysterious bugs present in the K&R code, and was on the whole easier to maintain than the old code.
For both TenDRA and DragonFly we're using ANSI C94 (C90 plus amendments) along with POSIX/SUS and the code in general tends to get cleaner and cleaner (and easier to understand in my opinion).
It is amazing, since I am doing a lot of these conversions on a plethora of different old time tools, how much programming errors/mistakes the old code managed to get away with...
I've done autoconf maintenance for some open source projects, I contributed to the auto* projects and my final conclusion is that they are not helping.
Instead I am just building my own detection code in a similar line as postfix' makedefs does. A lot clearer and keeps your sanity.
You might want to try DragonFly BSD then. It is synched to a lot of what it is 5.x, but took 4.x as it starting point and is moving into a different, in my opinion better (but I am biased), direction. E.g. NEWCARD is present on DF as well as a lot of architecture changes...
The thing is the US always has to overdo/overreact.
There's a fundamental difference in the way Europe works and the way the US works. I still find it hard to believe 'you guys' (the US inhabitants) actually descended from former Europeans. Amazing how a few hundred years can alter the fundaments of a society so.
I try and keep close tabs on what is happening in Europe, but many of the things suggested don't seem to be nearly as drastic as what the USA is doing.
So, I'd welcome any clear evidence contrary, never is bad to stay informed according to different viewpoints...
Erhm, I think you already tread your own constitution quite a lot since 9/11, but that could be me and what I am able to read over here through oour news (in Europe) and the Internet, as well was what I hear from American friends.
Personally this reaffirmed my decision to stay clear of the US, never visited, never will if this continues like that.
Fair enough. A bias crept into my wording for which I apologize.
That's author's decision, his view of the world. It has nothing to do with more free, or more restrictive. I mean, if it really was about ``more free'', and not some religious debate about a pet project, than all BSD OSes would be published as public domain, wouldn't they?
Unfortunately, that's nor pratical. I had a discussion with a fellow DragonFly developer who lives in Germany who pointed a very subtle difference out to me: US copyright laws has fundamental different roots then most in Europe. This means he cannot legally public domain his code. He has to use a BSDL or GPL or other license in order to make his software/code available.
Because XFree86 changed the license it cannot be shipped? Don't fool yourself.
Ever looked at the rest of the sources? Allow me to quote:
xc/src/lib/FS: ``* Copyright 1990 Network Computing Devices;
* Portions Copyright 1987 by Digital Equipment Corporation
*
* Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute, and sell this software
* and its documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee,
* provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and
* that both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear
* in supporting documentation, and that the names of Network Computing
* Devices or Digital not be used in advertising or publicity pertaining
* to distribution of the software without specific, written prior
* permission.''
``Copyright 1987, 1994, 1998 The Open Group
Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute, and sell this software and its
documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee, provided that
the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that
copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting
documentation.''
And these are just two examples.
By the way xc/src/lib/GLw/README.html is fun to read as well to see an example of how the knife cuts on both sides.
So how is this different? It was never GPL compatible to begin with. Clearly the above conflicts to clause 6 as well.
``3. The end-user documentation included with the redistribution, if any, must include the following acknowledgment: "This product includes software developed by The XFree86 Project, Inc (http://www.xfree86.org/) and its contributors", in the same place and form as other third-party acknowledgments. Alternately, this acknowledgment may appear in the software itself, in the same form and location as other such third-party acknowledgments.''
Yes, if you have end-user documentation it asks you to have a tiny line about how there's code from the XFree86 Project.
So where you get the idea from that it should be spit out during boot is beyond me. Yes, I know it can also be done in software. But that's done where normal attributions are normally kept, say an about box, or -EEK- perhaps/COPYRIGHT. And note that the software requirement is a MAY, not MUST.
Let me phrase a question back at you lot: "What is against giving credit where credit is due?" Because it looks like some common courtesy seems farfetched with a lot of people at the moment.
And by the way, it is similar to zlib's license, which is not mandatory, granted, but how many of you have actually credited Mark Adler and/or Jean-loup Gailly for their work?
The license was changed on some files owned by the XFree86 Project.
One of the major nits, as can be seen on the mailing list, is that code flows from XFree86 to say the Linux framebuffer project, which can incorporate the code, but it can never flow back due to it being GPL (viral nature and such).
The license only requests proper attribution in software and/or documentation like other third parties are getting.
Nothing spectacular if you ask me. Only thing that's getting people in a knot is that it is incompatible with the GPL's 6th clause (funny how people actually rate a 3 clause license with the only requirement proper attribution to be more restrictive than the god knows how many clauses GPL, but that's another discussion).
I fail to see what people are making a fuss about.
Not really. A swastika is the symbol of an organization that verifiably eradicated six million jews and similar numbers of gay people, Romany gypsies, etc.
Bah, learn proper history before commenting. The swastika is a Hindu holy symbol and associated with Ganesh, the Hindu god of good luck/fortune. It is also highly used by the Buddhists in the world since the arms symbolise the chain of rebirth and death. The four 'L's are associated with Life, Love, Luck, and Light.
In the World War Adolf Hitler was smart enough to take an established symbol like the Indian swastika and mirrored it and made it a symbol for the Nazis to be proud of. He did the same to the Napolean Iron Cross.
*wishing people who take their collective political correct heads our of their political correct arses, not everything revolves around the west and the middle east*
As per the W3C email I already emailed my concern to info@nen.nl.
As always, remain polite and explain why you think this is bad.
Ideas to use:
stickers on cars which show the country (at least in Europe): NL, DE, BE, and so on.
Commercial packaging of open source software, as I understand it the packager would need to pay, since it became commercial when he started to sell the CDs and DVDs.
Still, there was a copyright on them even though they were reverse engineered, that's not a general waiver to just do with it what you like, you still have to adhere to the BSD license. Furthermore, the fact that Andre, after the fact, got the documentation from the vendor has nothing to do with the issue.
They were copied verbatim without any attribution. In a community where people are so scared that the GPL'd code gets mistreated the same people are quite lax and tolerating when the reverse happens.
Why should the rest of the world care? The patent is only in the US. I could happily use the manners described in Europe of Asia since the patent doesn't apply there...
Furthermore, I wonder why W3C is concerned, since it only affects, what, 10% of the world (no idea) or so? Sure, they have an office in the USA, but also one in Europe and one in Japan. Close the office in the US. And dang, too bad for Eolas.
HTML 4.01 and even earlier (need to check) have OBJECT as a tag.
This allows any arbitrary content to be embedded within a hypermedia document. After reading the patent my understanding is that this would also quality. I am sure SCRIPT and IMG could explained that way as well. All it takes is a good lawyer.
In the Netherlands we already have had that system in place for years.
Our normal land lines have prefixes for the major cities, such as:
Rotterdam - 010 Amsterdam - 020 Utrecht - 030
GSM, buzzers/pagers, and such were using 06 prefixes. Sexlines and info numbers with costs per minute/conversation are 0900 (used to be 06 as well), and free informational phonenumbers (toll-free) are 0800.
Number portability for mobile phone numbers has been regulated in the Netherlands for a while now due to OPTA. If a provider has its services down for a certain percentage in a month the OPTA will fine the appropriate provider.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah sure.
Normative references to the Linux device list, init.d, run-levels, rpm as packaging, a bunch of user and group names that serve no purpose on other systems, and so on.
Please go fool someone else into thinking you can make it work on BSD, there's a reason why BSD and System V differ, because they are different architectural paths.
Not really actually.
There's a lot of numbers that were never allowed to be published with regard to Alpha and Superdome performance. The EV7 line of Alpha CPUs actually sold more than estimated and was picking up.
Funny.
My experiences have been the total opposite of yours. The ANSIfied code in general is clearer, solved mysterious bugs present in the K&R code, and was on the whole easier to maintain than the old code.
Either you are misreplying or misunderstanding my post.
I merely said that the config.h is a prime example of platform specific notes.
Sendmail has a master header file, IIRC config.h, which lists all kind of platform wrappings as well.
Also interested to compare notes with, also postfix' makedefs framework lists broken implementations on different platforms.
Just do it.
For both TenDRA and DragonFly we're using ANSI C94 (C90 plus amendments) along with POSIX/SUS and the code in general tends to get cleaner and cleaner (and easier to understand in my opinion).
It is amazing, since I am doing a lot of these conversions on a plethora of different old time tools, how much programming errors/mistakes the old code managed to get away with...
I have to agree.
I've done autoconf maintenance for some open source projects, I contributed to the auto* projects and my final conclusion is that they are not helping.
Instead I am just building my own detection code in a similar line as postfix' makedefs does. A lot clearer and keeps your sanity.
You might want to try DragonFly BSD then. It is synched to a lot of what it is 5.x, but took 4.x as it starting point and is moving into a different, in my opinion better (but I am biased), direction. E.g. NEWCARD is present on DF as well as a lot of architecture changes...
Sorry, but has already been done ages ago in the Netherlands.
This time it was a major battle between Ajax and Feyenoord (football clubs from Amsterdam and Rotterdam respectively) supporters, to quote:
"In March 1997 an Ajax fan died after an organised fight between hundreds of Feyenoord and Ajax hooligans in a meadow near Beverwijk."
This lead to the death of one Ajax supporter Cario Picornie.
They organised this fight using cellulars.
The thing is the US always has to overdo/overreact.
There's a fundamental difference in the way Europe works and the way the US works. I still find it hard to believe 'you guys' (the US inhabitants) actually descended from former Europeans. Amazing how a few hundred years can alter the fundaments of a society so.
I try and keep close tabs on what is happening in Europe, but many of the things suggested don't seem to be nearly as drastic as what the USA is doing.
So, I'd welcome any clear evidence contrary, never is bad to stay informed according to different viewpoints...
Erhm, I think you already tread your own constitution quite a lot since 9/11, but that could be me and what I am able to read over here through oour news (in Europe) and the Internet, as well was what I hear from American friends.
Personally this reaffirmed my decision to stay clear of the US, never visited, never will if this continues like that.
For all I know and can tell: no difference.
All three require you to acknowledge the originating party.
I am definately no lawyer, but the wording is very, very similar.
Fair enough. A bias crept into my wording for which I apologize.
That's author's decision, his view of the world. It has nothing to do with more free, or more restrictive. I mean, if it really was about ``more free'', and not some religious debate about a pet project, than all BSD OSes would be published as public domain, wouldn't they?
Unfortunately, that's nor pratical. I had a discussion with a fellow DragonFly developer who lives in Germany who pointed a very subtle difference out to me: US copyright laws has fundamental different roots then most in Europe. This means he cannot legally public domain his code. He has to use a BSDL or GPL or other license in order to make his software/code available.
My Slashdot ID would suggest otherwise. :)
But I am still positively naive that I hope people will do some investigation prior to just shouting out their emotional conclusion.
Because XFree86 changed the license it cannot be shipped? Don't fool yourself.
Ever looked at the rest of the sources? Allow me to quote:
xc/src/lib/FS: ``* Copyright 1990 Network Computing Devices;
* Portions Copyright 1987 by Digital Equipment Corporation
*
* Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute, and sell this software
* and its documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee,
* provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and
* that both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear
* in supporting documentation, and that the names of Network Computing
* Devices or Digital not be used in advertising or publicity pertaining
* to distribution of the software without specific, written prior
* permission.''
``Copyright 1987, 1994, 1998 The Open Group
Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute, and sell this software and its
documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee, provided that
the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that
copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting
documentation.''
And these are just two examples.
By the way xc/src/lib/GLw/README.html is fun to read as well to see an example of how the knife cuts on both sides.
So how is this different? It was never GPL compatible to begin with. Clearly the above conflicts to clause 6 as well.
``3. The end-user documentation included with the redistribution, if any, must include the following acknowledgment: "This product includes software developed by The XFree86 Project, Inc (http://www.xfree86.org/) and its contributors", in the same place and form as other third-party acknowledgments. Alternately, this acknowledgment may appear in the software itself, in the same form and location as other such third-party acknowledgments.''
Yes, if you have end-user documentation it asks you to have a tiny line about how there's code from the XFree86 Project.
So where you get the idea from that it should be spit out during boot is beyond me. Yes, I know it can also be done in software. But that's done where normal attributions are normally kept, say an about box, or -EEK- perhaps /COPYRIGHT. And note that the software requirement is a MAY, not MUST.
Let me phrase a question back at you lot: "What is against giving credit where credit is due?" Because it looks like some common courtesy seems farfetched with a lot of people at the moment.
And by the way, it is similar to zlib's license, which is not mandatory, granted, but how many of you have actually credited Mark Adler and/or Jean-loup Gailly for their work?
The license says none of that kind. Did you even *read* the new license?
Labeling this as informative shows just how careful people read what they comment about.
There are already some forks.
The license was changed on some files owned by the XFree86 Project.
One of the major nits, as can be seen on the mailing list, is that code flows from XFree86 to say the Linux framebuffer project, which can incorporate the code, but it can never flow back due to it being GPL (viral nature and such).
The license only requests proper attribution in software and/or documentation like other third parties are getting.
Nothing spectacular if you ask me. Only thing that's getting people in a knot is that it is incompatible with the GPL's 6th clause (funny how people actually rate a 3 clause license with the only requirement proper attribution to be more restrictive than the god knows how many clauses GPL, but that's another discussion).
I fail to see what people are making a fuss about.
Not really. A swastika is the symbol of an organization that verifiably eradicated six million jews and similar numbers of gay people, Romany gypsies, etc.
Bah, learn proper history before commenting. The swastika is a Hindu holy symbol and associated with Ganesh, the Hindu god of good luck/fortune. It is also highly used by the Buddhists in the world since the arms symbolise the chain of rebirth and death. The four 'L's are associated with Life, Love, Luck, and Light.
In the World War Adolf Hitler was smart enough to take an established symbol like the Indian swastika and mirrored it and made it a symbol for the Nazis to be proud of. He did the same to the Napolean Iron Cross.
*wishing people who take their collective political correct heads our of their political correct arses, not everything revolves around the west and the middle east*
I think you meant 'daimon', not diamon.
As per the W3C email I already emailed my concern to info@nen.nl.
As always, remain polite and explain why you think this is bad.
Ideas to use:
stickers on cars which show the country (at least in Europe): NL, DE, BE, and so on.
Commercial packaging of open source software, as I understand it the packager would need to pay, since it became commercial when he started to sell the CDs and DVDs.
I18n and l10n depend on standardized codes.
And so on...
[...] proved to be just some headders [sic]
Still, there was a copyright on them even though they were reverse engineered, that's not a general waiver to just do with it what you like, you still have to adhere to the BSD license. Furthermore, the fact that Andre, after the fact, got the documentation from the vendor has nothing to do with the issue.
They were copied verbatim without any attribution. In a community where people are so scared that the GPL'd code gets mistreated the same people are quite lax and tolerating when the reverse happens.
The knife does cut on both sides.
OK, just a very harsh and random thought, but...
Why should the rest of the world care? The patent is only in the US. I could happily use the manners described in Europe of Asia since the patent doesn't apply there...
Furthermore, I wonder why W3C is concerned, since it only affects, what, 10% of the world (no idea) or so? Sure, they have an office in the USA, but also one in Europe and one in Japan. Close the office in the US. And dang, too bad for Eolas.
Don't be too sure.
HTML 4.01 and even earlier (need to check) have OBJECT as a tag.
This allows any arbitrary content to be embedded within a hypermedia document. After reading the patent my understanding is that this would also quality. I am sure SCRIPT and IMG could explained that way as well. All it takes is a good lawyer.
In the Netherlands we already have had that system in place for years.
Our normal land lines have prefixes for the major cities, such as:
Rotterdam - 010
Amsterdam - 020
Utrecht - 030
GSM, buzzers/pagers, and such were using 06 prefixes. Sexlines and info numbers with costs per minute/conversation are 0900 (used to be 06 as well), and free informational phonenumbers (toll-free) are 0800.
Number portability for mobile phone numbers has been regulated in the Netherlands for a while now due to OPTA. If a provider has its services down for a certain percentage in a month the OPTA will fine the appropriate provider.