This isn't even some LGPL library situation, it's more of a bash-script/CMD batch level thing.
Using a bash-script/CMD batch level thing does not avoid the GPL restrictions.
Invoking a GPL program, supplying it input, and parsing its output, means that the program that invokes GPG is not merely aggregated with, but is actually part of a derivative work that includes GPG.
Based on the FSF's position, this would be a derivative work, because the package is a derivative work that relies on the operation of the code in GPG.
It doesn't really matter whether you distribute GPG with it or not; including a "GPG downloader" in the installer would be exactly the same as trying to distribute a dynamically linked binary, with a script to download dynamic library files from a 3rd party.
The work as a whole is still subject to GPL in both cases, and a violation of the text of the GPL and the spirit of the GPL occurs there, if source for the installer is not released as GPL and distributed properly, in that case.
The article doesn't say it, and
at no time was Microsoft reported as saying there were no plans to patch this bug.
Just because you are unaware of them reporting they will release a patch does not mean they have no plan to patch it.
They have offered workarounds and appear to be treating this seriously.
Just because it's the weekend and they haven't told you there will be a patch available monday DOES NOT mean they are ignoring or refusing to work on patching this.
You know... none of these signed code restrictions do the least about someone removing electronics from the calculator and inserting their own.
Your signed code enforcement won't work if the hardware installed in the calculator doesn't match the original at all, but maybe is designed to have the same look and feel.
If you have a modified OS on the calculator stored in its EEPROM there is no such thing as "resetting to factory defaults", that doesn't require you to have a fresh copy of the original OS on hand, wipe the PROM, and then flash the correct code
I can just about guarantee they didn't do that in your math class.
The modified OS can show it is resetting to factory defaults, but in fact, in the modified OS "the defaults" still contain test-related information or other details that would give you an advantage
I understand for some occasions (tests, etc) it has to be a calculator, but I doubt it would be allowed to run modified software.
Time for discreet calculators is almost over.
"For tests" is probably the sole reason TI is being so snarky about people wanting to run 3rd party OSes on the calculators --- cheating enablement, causing schools to not allow their calculators, maybe.
The more likely reason is it risks depriving TI of their lucrative market licensing third party app modules for their calculators.
Since the driver is what actually interprets the messages sent from the hardware... the driver will have to tell the OS whether or not the hardware says the driver is legit.
See the problem? There's a trust model violation inherent to the idea of 'asking the hardware if the driver is OK'
Oh... and what if a piece of malicious hardware is plugged in, or for that matter, a piece of hardware that already has malicious firmware on it?
Then the compromised hardware can just say 'YES'..
'This (malicious driver), is of course legitimate.'
The benefit of making sure some kiddie can't hack the DRM and get illegal access to the game 10 days prior to release is not worth 100 million.
Nor is the cost of developing a special encryption of the installer tarball just to allow the pre-downloads 100 million.
But the cost is not zero, and it is difficult to justify that cost, when there are existing anti-piracy measures in the software that can be used for free.
I doubt the early release was worth developing a new type of 'lock box' for.
They most likely just have an installer designed to phone home and ask for permission before it begins to extract the executables, or allow execution of an executable.
Probably much like the serial number check, or the check they'll use when the digital version of the game is actually played.
IOW: I suspect they are just re-using the DRM for this purpose, and don't have special purpose-built logic for the special purpose of
pre-distributing a package with a crypto-unbreakable lock.
The keys to decrypt anything are probably [somewhere] in the installer itself.
Because there are other types of server than DNSs. For instance, I have a headless file server at home that also handles printing and a number of other miscellaneous functions.
So what? Some folks run webservers too, does that mean Apache should be included in a minimal install? Hell no.
Only things that are necessary for all installs should be present in a minimal installation.
Most servers do not need any functions provided by CUPS.
It's a bit different nowadays, things don't run from inetd.
They run daemonized or from xinetd.
And old inetd crap is always turned off by default.
No chargen for you, sorry.
You won't be tricking IRC users to accepting DCCs from you to chargen ports on random Redhat EL servers, at least... (EG)
The minimal instead of Redhat EL is decently bare, once you turn off kudzu, CUPS, bluetooth, pcscd, haldaemon, rpc.portmap, rpc.idmapd, rpc.mountd, and nfsd.
I never understood why a minimal install includes CUPS, by the way; who the hell wants to print something from a DNS server?
However, in some cases, sticking your entire body in the hole might help, if the hole is deep enough, and the predator is sufficiently large and unable to reach into the hole.
It's not 10 meters, they're requiring press keep a farther distance. They're not letting anyone within 70 feet of a boom, beach, or area where cleanup is occuring.
I assure you that a bricked device does NOT meet that dictionary definition of brick and never does.
Any metaphor can be taken too far.
bricked means made similar to a brick by a software change, not physically made to match the classical dictionary definition of the word brick.
If you can fix it easily without opening the device up, then it's not a brick.
If you have to crack it open (disassemble it), and manipulate electronics physically or modify them, then that is an unbricking technique, but the device was still a brick before the unbricking.
On your way travelling to your vacation spot, you take a small course deviation from your plan, and stop to get something to eat and do some extra touring.
Oops! Accident
The road's closed, so you backtrack and take a different path.
Oops! Accident
You get behind a slow car, so you decide to pass them, using the vacant left lane.
Oops! That's an accident
The whether gets really nasty so you slow down, causing your arrival time to be wrong..
Oops! Accident
Some jerk pulls out in front of you, so you slam on your breaks, and barely manage to avoid hitting them.
Oops! Accident
You get to a road where the speed limit is 45 due to an unannounced change from 65, according to your travel plan, you will travel at 65... oops Accident no matter what speed you travel.
(You travel 45, it's an accident because you failed to follow your plan;
you travel 65, then it's an accident because you disobeyed the road space regulations)
Slashdot Mirror
Roaming is when you actually leave the planet earth, and the fees are (somewhat) reasonable when in high earth orbit, or on other planets.
Also, gotta make up for the loss of targeted ad revenue, since geolocation no longer works when you are in orbit.
Save the torrenting/movie downloading for when you come ashore and plug in.
Either that or leech off neighboring boat's unsecured WiFi.
Better do it very quietly though, depart quickly, and don't leave your name...
No pain? hell... why isn't its use standard and in preference to needles, then?
This isn't even some LGPL library situation, it's more of a bash-script/CMD batch level thing.
Using a bash-script/CMD batch level thing does not avoid the GPL restrictions. Invoking a GPL program, supplying it input, and parsing its output, means that the program that invokes GPG is not merely aggregated with, but is actually part of a derivative work that includes GPG.
Based on the FSF's position, this would be a derivative work, because the package is a derivative work that relies on the operation of the code in GPG.
It doesn't really matter whether you distribute GPG with it or not; including a "GPG downloader" in the installer would be exactly the same as trying to distribute a dynamically linked binary, with a script to download dynamic library files from a 3rd party.
The work as a whole is still subject to GPL in both cases, and a violation of the text of the GPL and the spirit of the GPL occurs there, if source for the installer is not released as GPL and distributed properly, in that case.
The article doesn't say it, and at no time was Microsoft reported as saying there were no plans to patch this bug.
Just because you are unaware of them reporting they will release a patch does not mean they have no plan to patch it.
They have offered workarounds and appear to be treating this seriously.
Just because it's the weekend and they haven't told you there will be a patch available monday DOES NOT mean they are ignoring or refusing to work on patching this.
Good luck answering a math test question after you have lost fingers, so you can no longer write the answer.....
You know... none of these signed code restrictions do the least about someone removing electronics from the calculator and inserting their own.
Your signed code enforcement won't work if the hardware installed in the calculator doesn't match the original at all, but maybe is designed to have the same look and feel.
If you have a modified OS on the calculator stored in its EEPROM there is no such thing as "resetting to factory defaults", that doesn't require you to have a fresh copy of the original OS on hand, wipe the PROM, and then flash the correct code
I can just about guarantee they didn't do that in your math class.
The modified OS can show it is resetting to factory defaults, but in fact, in the modified OS "the defaults" still contain test-related information or other details that would give you an advantage
I understand for some occasions (tests, etc) it has to be a calculator, but I doubt it would be allowed to run modified software.
Time for discreet calculators is almost over.
"For tests" is probably the sole reason TI is being so snarky about people wanting to run 3rd party OSes on the calculators --- cheating enablement, causing schools to not allow their calculators, maybe.
The more likely reason is it risks depriving TI of their lucrative market licensing third party app modules for their calculators.
What you are saying is equivalent to saying
"Lighting things up is one of the base operations of electricity. Without light emitting circuits (lightbulbs LEDS etc), you don't HAVE electricity.
Since the driver is what actually interprets the messages sent from the hardware... the driver will have to tell the OS whether or not the hardware says the driver is legit.
See the problem? There's a trust model violation inherent to the idea of 'asking the hardware if the driver is OK'
Oh... and what if a piece of malicious hardware is plugged in, or for that matter, a piece of hardware that already has malicious firmware on it?
Then the compromised hardware can just say 'YES'.. 'This (malicious driver), is of course legitimate.'
The benefit of making sure some kiddie can't hack the DRM and get illegal access to the game 10 days prior to release is not worth 100 million.
Nor is the cost of developing a special encryption of the installer tarball just to allow the pre-downloads 100 million.
But the cost is not zero, and it is difficult to justify that cost, when there are existing anti-piracy measures in the software that can be used for free.
Shipping GPG isn't the problem, it's integrating use of GPG into the installer.
Starcraft is definitely not distributed under the GPL, so including GPG in the package would be infringement...
I doubt the early release was worth developing a new type of 'lock box' for.
They most likely just have an installer designed to phone home and ask for permission before it begins to extract the executables, or allow execution of an executable.
Probably much like the serial number check, or the check they'll use when the digital version of the game is actually played.
IOW: I suspect they are just re-using the DRM for this purpose, and don't have special purpose-built logic for the special purpose of pre-distributing a package with a crypto-unbreakable lock.
The keys to decrypt anything are probably [somewhere] in the installer itself.
Unless someone hacks a beta executable to think it's not a beta executable...
Because there are other types of server than DNSs. For instance, I have a headless file server at home that also handles printing and a number of other miscellaneous functions.
So what? Some folks run webservers too, does that mean Apache should be included in a minimal install? Hell no.
Only things that are necessary for all installs should be present in a minimal installation.
Most servers do not need any functions provided by CUPS.
It's a bit different nowadays, things don't run from inetd. They run daemonized or from xinetd. And old inetd crap is always turned off by default.
No chargen for you, sorry. You won't be tricking IRC users to accepting DCCs from you to chargen ports on random Redhat EL servers, at least... (EG)
The minimal instead of Redhat EL is decently bare, once you turn off kudzu, CUPS, bluetooth, pcscd, haldaemon, rpc.portmap, rpc.idmapd, rpc.mountd, and nfsd.
I never understood why a minimal install includes CUPS, by the way; who the hell wants to print something from a DNS server?
However, in some cases, sticking your entire body in the hole might help, if the hole is deep enough, and the predator is sufficiently large and unable to reach into the hole.
It's not 10 meters, they're requiring press keep a farther distance. They're not letting anyone within 70 feet of a boom, beach, or area where cleanup is occuring.
Hm.. so they circumvented BP's protection mechanism.... i'm sure it won't be long until their seaplane captain gets some sort of DMCA letter <g>
When in doubt consult the dictionary
I assure you that a bricked device does NOT meet that dictionary definition of brick and never does. Any metaphor can be taken too far.
bricked means made similar to a brick by a software change, not physically made to match the classical dictionary definition of the word brick.
If you can fix it easily without opening the device up, then it's not a brick.
If you have to crack it open (disassemble it), and manipulate electronics physically or modify them, then that is an unbricking technique, but the device was still a brick before the unbricking.
Just because you have discovered an unbricking technique does NOT invalidate the fact that it WAS in fact bricked.
Bricking is not defined as forever.
Bricking means the device is hosed and cannot be recovered without breaking in and modifying the hardware.
Breaking into the JTAG interface of a consumer device and reprogramming PROM are definitely hardware modification techniques that are non-trivial.
Hm... so if the DMV were more like the FAA.......
On your way travelling to your vacation spot, you take a small course deviation from your plan, and stop to get something to eat and do some extra touring. Oops! Accident
The road's closed, so you backtrack and take a different path. Oops! Accident
You get behind a slow car, so you decide to pass them, using the vacant left lane. Oops! That's an accident
The whether gets really nasty so you slow down, causing your arrival time to be wrong.. Oops! Accident
Some jerk pulls out in front of you, so you slam on your breaks, and barely manage to avoid hitting them. Oops! Accident
You get to a road where the speed limit is 45 due to an unannounced change from 65, according to your travel plan, you will travel at 65... oops Accident no matter what speed you travel. (You travel 45, it's an accident because you failed to follow your plan; you travel 65, then it's an accident because you disobeyed the road space regulations)