Due to pine's non-free license (and, likely, the advent of mutt), Pine fell out of active maintenance by Debian.
I'm not a pine user myself, being an MH-E developer, but:
# apt-get --only-source build-dep pine
# apt-get --only-source -b source pine
pine v4.50 was uploaded yesterday afternoon.
Peter
Distribution of modified binaries _is_ illegal.
on
PINE Releases 4.50
·
· Score: 1
Not entirely.
What do you mean, not entirely? Either it's illegal or it's not. There's no middle ground.
The current license says you can't distribute modified versions of pine binaries.
It pissed me off because the controlling group within Debian didn't want to work out a deal with UW to allow Pine to be distributed as a normal package within Debian.
You mean a packaged binary instead of an installer? I don't think anyone would stop you.
But what's wrong with the current setup:
# apt-get --only-source build-dep pine
# apt-get --only-source -b source pine
?
Also, the new version 4.50 hit Debian's incoming already...
The document is said to contain encrypted secrets that could lead to control of foreign goverments. Unfortunately, Agent Sydney Bristow learned of the mission to steal the document too late for the CIA to arrange a counter-mission.
It seems that "Full Metal Challenge" will need to come up with new challenges next year, since the contestants this year had to design their vehicules without knowing exactly what the challenge is. Is this the case?
I'll be lucky if it's fixed at the next release, which they'll sell to me. They won't fix the bug in the defective product for free.
by
I'll be lucky if it's fixed at the next release, which they'll sell to me a year later. They won't fix the bug in the defective product for free, and they will rarely fix before the next release.
In most comsumer software, you get fixes by upgrading. That costs more money, and that takes much time waiting for that release to happen.
RedHat 7.3 infamously still ships with version 1.5.2 as the default, while SuSE 8.0 is hanging in there with version 2.2
Debian unstable also has 2.2 as the default python, although the stable release has 2.1. But with the huge number of packages which depend on it, it takes a while to migrate all of them. So testing still has 2.1.
I'm not saying you should hunt the net for random patches, but rather that the person that found and fixed the bug sends the patch upstream, where it is evaluated and quickly integrated into the sources.
When I find bugs in everyday commercial software, I'm simply stuck with it and have to find a workaround (sometimes by hunting the net!). I'll be lucky if it's fixed at the next release, which they'll sell to me. They won't fix the bug in the defective product for free.
I'm saying that the argument that Linux is superior to Windows because it comes with source code is specious at best. To the vast majority of users and potential users, the source code to the operating system would do nothing more than occupy CDROM-- and, if installed, hard drive-- space.
Even you you can't do anything with it, the fact that it's available means that it's also available to others who can fix problems, perhaps the same problems you have. This leads to faster fixes for you.
Well, LaTeX scales well to a larger thesis. I wrote my Ph.D. thesis using it, containing some math, and I was glad I did. In addition, there are nice helpers now (emacs with AUC-TeX mode, reftex, font-latex, bib-cite, etc).
Granted, we don't work on sailboat and usually use bigger ships, but we also work on 30-foot boats. Sorry to disappoint anyone, but we use plain laptops on the smaller boats, and even desktop on larger ships. Nothing too special about them. (Have a backup scheme).
What he's saying is that if everyone would distribute their software under the GPL, this type of (partially) non-free distribution wouldn't be possible.
Well, all they need to do is make a proprietary installer (or any other required bit of software). Everything else could be GPLed and they would still be okay with their per-seat licensing.
That doesn't mean we should make it easier for 'em and not GPL our code.
Re:software developers v users - the battle contin
on
United Linux is Here
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps you should see the dozens of e-mails I received from Debian users reporting the "'which gawk' returned an error" message from my software. Perhaps you should tell those users that gawk was indeed there when each one specifically told me it wasn't.
Now I understand... You expect to find gawk pointing to another awk when gawk isn't installed? Yikes!
Why didn't your software look for awk instead. Isn't that more reasonable? If you need gawk features, tell your Debian users to install the gawk package. Don't blame Debian for your bad assumptions.
As the saying goes, there's no replacement for displacement... A 1.6L or whatever Honda is laughable in the face of a common Chevy 350 (5.7L)
How about compared to a 3L engine of a Formula One car? You might get off the line quicker, but it won't be long before the F1 car catches up. Same for a race motorcycle that, guess what, doesn't have a 5L engine.
No, it's all all about displacement. It's about power-to-weight ratio.
Image a cable or dish provider feeding you with 60 channels of music at all times. Does that mean they would have to pay $28.80 per day per subscriber to use this technology?
Okay, so the comsumer can only listen to one of those at a time per decoder. So $0.48 per day? How do they know whether anyone is listening?
Slashdot Mirror
Due to pine's non-free license (and, likely, the advent of mutt), Pine fell out of active maintenance by Debian.
I'm not a pine user myself, being an MH-E developer, but:
# apt-get --only-source build-dep pine
# apt-get --only-source -b source pine
pine v4.50 was uploaded yesterday afternoon.
Peter
Not entirely.
What do you mean, not entirely? Either it's illegal or it's not. There's no middle ground.
The current license says you can't distribute modified versions of pine binaries.
It pissed me off because the controlling group within Debian didn't want to work out a deal with UW to allow Pine to be distributed as a normal package within Debian.
You mean a packaged binary instead of an installer?
I don't think anyone would stop you.
But what's wrong with the current setup:
# apt-get --only-source build-dep pine
# apt-get --only-source -b source pine
?
Also, the new version 4.50 hit Debian's incoming already...
Peter
The document is said to contain encrypted secrets
that could lead to control of foreign goverments.
Unfortunately, Agent Sydney Bristow learned of the mission to steal the document too late for the CIA to arrange a counter-mission.
> Was it over when the Nazi's[sic] bombed Pearl Harbor?
Sorry, I thought the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.
I thought that was intentional. It certainly made it funnier.
By your math your probably already rich.
;-)
100 - 83 is 17, not 13. Yeesh.
Yes, that's embarassing.
Not quite as embarassing as spelling "you're" as "your", but embarassing.
Someday, us Canucks will all be rich I say! :-)
It seems that "Full Metal Challenge" will need to come up with new challenges next year, since the contestants this year had to design their vehicules without knowing exactly what the challenge is. Is this the case?
Okay, replace
I'll be lucky if it's fixed at the next release, which they'll sell to me. They won't fix the bug in the defective product for free.
by
I'll be lucky if it's fixed at the next release, which they'll sell to me a year later. They won't fix the bug in the defective product for free, and they will rarely fix before the next release.
In most comsumer software, you get fixes by upgrading. That costs more money, and that takes much time waiting for that release to happen.
RedHat 7.3 infamously still ships with version 1.5.2 as the default, while SuSE 8.0 is hanging in there with version 2.2
Debian unstable also has 2.2 as the default python, although the stable release has 2.1. But with the huge number of packages which depend on it, it takes a while to migrate all of them. So testing still has 2.1.
I'm not saying you should hunt the net for random patches, but rather that the person that found and fixed the bug sends the patch upstream, where it is evaluated and quickly integrated into the sources.
When I find bugs in everyday commercial software, I'm simply stuck with it and have to find a workaround (sometimes by hunting the net!).
I'll be lucky if it's fixed at the next release, which they'll sell to me. They won't fix the bug in the defective product for free.
I'm saying that the argument that Linux is superior to Windows because it comes with source code is specious at best. To the vast majority of users and potential users, the source code to the operating system would do nothing more than occupy CDROM-- and, if installed, hard drive-- space.
Even you you can't do anything with it, the fact that it's available means that it's also available to others who can fix problems, perhaps the same problems you have. This leads to faster fixes for you.
Well, LaTeX scales well to a larger thesis. I wrote my Ph.D. thesis using it, containing some math, and I was glad I did. In addition, there are nice helpers now (emacs with AUC-TeX mode, reftex, font-latex, bib-cite, etc).
I'm writing a doctoral proposal right now
Then use LaTeX.
http://gri.sourceforge.net
Doesn't do 3-D, but very good on 2-D (including contours and colour-coded images).
Granted, we don't work on sailboat and usually use bigger ships, but we also work on 30-foot boats. Sorry to disappoint anyone, but we use plain laptops on the smaller boats, and even desktop on larger ships. Nothing too special about them. (Have a backup scheme).
debian-installer is not only the official way to boot for sarge, but boot-floppies are declared dead:
n -project-200207/msg00094.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2002/debia
What he's saying is that if everyone would distribute their software under the GPL, this type of (partially) non-free distribution wouldn't be possible.
Well, all they need to do is make a proprietary installer (or any other required bit of software). Everything else could be GPLed and they would still be okay with their per-seat licensing.
That doesn't mean we should make it easier for 'em and not GPL our code.
Perhaps you should see the dozens of e-mails I received from Debian users reporting the "'which gawk' returned an error" message from my software. Perhaps you should tell those users that gawk was indeed there when each one specifically told me it wasn't.
Now I understand... You expect to find gawk pointing to another awk when gawk isn't installed? Yikes!
Why didn't your software look for awk instead. Isn't that more reasonable? If you need gawk features, tell your Debian users to install the gawk package. Don't blame Debian for your bad assumptions.
As the saying goes, there's no replacement for displacement... A 1.6L or whatever Honda is laughable in the face of a common Chevy 350 (5.7L)
How about compared to a 3L engine of a Formula One car? You might get off the line quicker, but it won't be long before the F1 car catches up. Same for a race motorcycle that, guess what, doesn't have a 5L engine.
No, it's all all about displacement. It's about power-to-weight ratio.
Who moderated that insightful?
It's a troll I see posted verbatim all the time.
You just got DSL didn't you?
They want to make sure you still want and need it after awhile.
Image a cable or dish provider feeding you with 60 channels of music at all times. Does that mean they would have to pay $28.80 per day per subscriber to use this technology?
Okay, so the comsumer can only listen to one of those at a time per decoder. So $0.48 per day? How do they know whether anyone is listening?
The CNN story says their defense will be
arguing the law is vague, too broad and shouldn't apply to a foreign company.
It's that the same as We idn't violate Russian law?
http://gri.sf.net instead of gnuplot
It's easy:
Keep your patches in the same directory as the top-level linux source directory, and
$ linux/scripts/patch-kernel
It's been there forever.