You just need to get slaves^H^H^H^H^H^Hvolunteers from outside the country. =)
Of course, the way the US INS (Immegration and Naturalization service) works, they might still come after you. I used to commute to the US for work, and the INS folks gave me nightmares more than once and I *had* all the correct visa information.
I remember last year when I installed an NT 4.0 system from an Old CD. It installed with IE 2 and I couldn't get to Microsofts site it install it. I wound up downloading netscape so I could download IE.
Really? I use CSS-P on my hurddocs page, and we use it all the time at work. There's a bug with the scrollbars on the hurddocs site, but the layout works well.
There was bug that IIRC was fixed in the last week where if your cache would fill up (to the size set in the prefs), you'd start to see corruption and crashes. Most people have been deleting their prefs, etc for so long for testing, the bug stayed around for a long time. I haven't had the problem in at least 4 or 5 days.
Are there any mirrors of the rawhide stuff? Redhat's main ftp server is hard enough to look at, much less when there's a beta announcement on slashdot.
As a GNU maintainers, I find the assignment forms to be one of those necessary evils for getting the job done. I get challenged almost everytime by people who demand to know why they need to do it, and I have even refused patches when someone won't fill out the paperwork.
That said, I support doing copyright assignments to the FSF because it allows me to do the job I want to do. When I program for GNU, I don't want to deal with lawsuits, liability insurrance, and license agreements. Canada has a screwed up enough legal system without me trying to understand what happens in the USA (Much less the rest of the world). When the FSF takes over ownership of my program, I no longer need to worry about this. I also like the fact that the FSF can choose to change/modify the licensing as appropriate.
I'm also not without protection. Specifically two things: The GPL ensures that if the FSF does get corrupted, I am free to fork and continue (taking on the legal burden myself, or with whatever organization with which I choose to associate). I am also protected by specific provisions in the assignment form:
(d) FSF agrees to grant back to Developer, and does hereby grant, non-exclusive, royalty-free and non-cancellable rights to use the Works (i.e., Developer's changes and/or enhancements, not the Program that they enhance), as Developer sees fit; this grant back does not limit FSF's rights and public rights acquired through this agreement.
4. FSF agrees that all distribution of the Works, or of any work "based on the Works", or the Program as enhanced by the Works, that takes place under the control of FSF or its agents or successors, shall be on terms that explicitly and perpetually permit anyone possessing a copy of the work to which the terms apply, and possessing accurate notice of these terms, to redistribute copies of the work to anyone on the same terms. These terms shall not restrict which members of the public copies may be distributed to. These terms shall not require a member of the public to pay any royalty to FSF or to anyone else for any permitted use of the work they apply to, or to communicate with FSF or its agents or assignees in any way either when redistribution is performed or on any other occasion.
5. FSF agrees that any program "based on the Works" offered to the public by FSF or its agents or assignees shall be offered in the form of machine-readable source code, in addition to any other forms of FSF's choosing. However, FSF is free to choose at its convenience the media of distribution for machine-readable source code and may charge a fee of its choosing for copies.
The full text if you're interested can be found at the GCC site's contributing section. If there are cases where there are "extraordinary circumstances", the FSF is sometimes willing to do up special assignment forms to help. RMS normally just deals with those, however.
Youngin's all of you! We (My family) started our first BBS in 1980, the third one in the lower mainland (Of Vancouver, BC, Canada). I've been looking for the old TradeWars (pre-2000, the original one) for a little while, and I've been thinking that it would be fun to setup a telnet bbs or web bbs with old-style online games.
Correct, to make money programming one must be paid by an employer. However, does that employer's profits have to come from the sales of the software? No! For example: profits can come through the sale of support contracts, or through contracting a company to make upgrades that you're interested in seeing. Intel *paid* Cygnus (A RedHat Company) to do upgrades to GCC, because it was worth it to them to have a compiler that would run everywhere and generate code for that target. If you want a picky change done, you can pay the developers to incorporate that change for you.
This allows people to go through and fix minor (or major things) if they have the skill to do it and want to, or have the option of getting paid to do this work if you're skilled to do it. As an example, I can't think of how many times I've wanted to go and fix the code to MS-Hearts to make sure that it doesn't hand out duplicate cards (It *does* actually cheat. Stupid game.) As a hobby programmer working in IT, I could do that.
There's plenty of major projects out there that are just crying for support organizations and Free Software, and companies will pay money to get support. We just have to get over our fear of "If it's open noone will pay me" because it's incorrect.
Example, the GNU automake/autoconf generates makefiles that are only usable with gmake. Example, shell scripts from GNU are invariably designed for bash and not generic sh. Example, most GNU software requires the extensions in glibc, and will not work with any other C library. GNU could easily make their stuff work seamlessly
You haven't researched your point very carefully. Automake produces Makefiles that are compatible with any POSIX make, and many others. I have used my automake-generated archives on Old SPARC systems without any difficulties. You can choose to add rules to the Makefiles that are not compatible, but that's not Automake's fault.
I have also compiled gcc and a dozen or so different systems (Windows, SCO Openserver, Unixware, Sun SPARC, Qnx, HPUX, etc...) and autoconf has always performed on those systems to help me get a useful environment. All of those programs (flex, bison, gcc, make, binutils) *all* use Glibc extensions. All of those programs compile using portability libraries supplied with the system.
Think, *then* post.
Re:Red Hat Linux 6.2 Release notes
on
RedHat 6.2 - RSN
·
· Score: 1
Glibc is not tremendously difficult to upgrade, you need to do a few things though:
1) Make sure that you have the add-ons crypt and linuxthreads. 2) Build in a separate subdirectory../glibc-2.1.3/configure --prefix=/usr --enable-add-ons 3) Make sure it passes `make check'. Under *no* circumstances should you ever install a buggy compile as your main libc.
Slashdot Mirror
I like my religion to be modular, that's why I'm a Unitarian Universalist!
You just need to get slaves^H^H^H^H^H^Hvolunteers from outside the country. =)
Of course, the way the US INS (Immegration and Naturalization service) works, they might still come after you. I used to commute to the US for work, and the INS folks gave me nightmares more than once and I *had* all the correct visa information.
I remember last year when I installed an NT 4.0 system from an Old CD. It installed with IE 2 and I couldn't get to Microsofts site it install it. I wound up downloading netscape so I could download IE.
Really? I use CSS-P on my hurddocs page, and we use it all the time at work. There's a bug with the scrollbars on the hurddocs site, but the layout works well.
IE5 just bags on that page, though.
There was bug that IIRC was fixed in the last week where if your cache would fill up (to the size set in the prefs), you'd start to see corruption and crashes. Most people have been deleting their prefs, etc for so long for testing, the bug stayed around for a long time. I haven't had the problem in at least 4 or 5 days.
Are there any mirrors of the rawhide stuff? Redhat's main ftp server is hard enough to look at, much less when there's a beta announcement on slashdot.
Hmmm. Autocad 13. That was about when the product became *truly* unusable, wasn't it?
That said, I support doing copyright assignments to the FSF because it allows me to do the job I want to do. When I program for GNU, I don't want to deal with lawsuits, liability insurrance, and license agreements. Canada has a screwed up enough legal system without me trying to understand what happens in the USA (Much less the rest of the world). When the FSF takes over ownership of my program, I no longer need to worry about this. I also like the fact that the FSF can choose to change/modify the licensing as appropriate.
I'm also not without protection. Specifically two things: The GPL ensures that if the FSF does get corrupted, I am free to fork and continue (taking on the legal burden myself, or with whatever organization with which I choose to associate). I am also protected by specific provisions in the assignment form:
(d) FSF agrees to grant back to Developer, and does hereby grant, non-exclusive, royalty-free and non-cancellable rights to use the Works (i.e., Developer's changes and/or enhancements, not the Program that they enhance), as Developer sees fit; this grant back does not limit FSF's rights and public rights acquired through this agreement.
4. FSF agrees that all distribution of the Works, or of any work "based on the Works", or the Program as enhanced by the Works, that takes place under the control of FSF or its agents or successors, shall be on terms that explicitly and perpetually permit anyone possessing a copy of the work to which the terms apply, and possessing accurate notice of these terms, to redistribute copies of the work to anyone on the same terms. These terms shall not restrict which members of the public copies may be distributed to. These terms shall not require a member of the public to pay any royalty to FSF or to anyone else for any permitted use of the work they apply to, or to communicate with FSF or its agents or assignees in any way either when redistribution is performed or on any other occasion.
5. FSF agrees that any program "based on the Works" offered to the public by FSF or its agents or assignees shall be offered in the form of machine-readable source code, in addition to any other forms of FSF's choosing. However, FSF is free to choose at its convenience the media of distribution for machine-readable source code and may charge a fee of its choosing for copies.
The full text if you're interested can be found at the GCC site's contributing section. If there are cases where there are "extraordinary circumstances", the FSF is sometimes willing to do up special assignment forms to help. RMS normally just deals with those, however.
If you're interested in seeing the information given to maintainers of GNU packages, take a look at Information for Maintainers of GNU software on the GNU site, specifically the section on Copyrights.
(disclaimer: I program for GNU, I don't represent, work for, etc - My opinion only...)
Youngin's all of you! We (My family) started our first BBS in 1980, the third one in the lower mainland (Of Vancouver, BC, Canada). I've been looking for the old TradeWars (pre-2000, the original one) for a little while, and I've been thinking that it would be fun to setup a telnet bbs or web bbs with old-style online games.
There were a few that would be worth porting...
I didn't think that slashdot had an editorial position on anything!
Correct, to make money programming one must be paid by an employer. However, does that employer's profits have to come from the sales of the software? No! For example: profits can come through the sale of support contracts, or through contracting a company to make upgrades that you're interested in seeing. Intel *paid* Cygnus (A RedHat Company) to do upgrades to GCC, because it was worth it to them to have a compiler that would run everywhere and generate code for that target. If you want a picky change done, you can pay the developers to incorporate that change for you.
This allows people to go through and fix minor (or major things) if they have the skill to do it and want to, or have the option of getting paid to do this work if you're skilled to do it. As an example, I can't think of how many times I've wanted to go and fix the code to MS-Hearts to make sure that it doesn't hand out duplicate cards (It *does* actually cheat. Stupid game.) As a hobby programmer working in IT, I could do that.
There's plenty of major projects out there that are just crying for support organizations and Free Software, and companies will pay money to get support. We just have to get over our fear of "If it's open noone will pay me" because it's incorrect.
Example, the GNU automake/autoconf generates makefiles that are only usable with gmake. Example, shell scripts from GNU are invariably designed for bash and not generic sh. Example, most GNU software requires the extensions in glibc, and will not work with any other C library. GNU could easily make their stuff work seamlessly
You haven't researched your point very carefully. Automake produces Makefiles that are compatible with any POSIX make, and many others. I have used my automake-generated archives on Old SPARC systems without any difficulties. You can choose to add rules to the Makefiles that are not compatible, but that's not Automake's fault.
I have also compiled gcc and a dozen or so different systems (Windows, SCO Openserver, Unixware, Sun SPARC, Qnx, HPUX, etc...) and autoconf has always performed on those systems to help me get a useful environment. All of those programs (flex, bison, gcc, make, binutils) *all* use Glibc extensions. All of those programs compile using portability libraries supplied with the system.
Think, *then* post.
Glibc is not tremendously difficult to upgrade, you need to do a few things though:
../glibc-2.1.3/configure --prefix=/usr --enable-add-ons
1) Make sure that you have the add-ons crypt and linuxthreads.
2) Build in a separate subdirectory
3) Make sure it passes `make check'. Under *no* circumstances should you ever install a buggy compile as your main libc.
Vegetarians Unite! Protest Butcher shop icon! Demand Slaughterhouse imagery to increase awareness of animal cruelty! RaRaRa!! =)
Okay, I'm having a silly day....