Yes, but compare with what I said, and you won't find major differences. Note that _any_ free software is open source as to the OSD (http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html). I didn't say it was incorrect.
Oops, sorry for my misquoting. As to the non-software-not-certifying, I asked why not to replace "software" by "work" in the thread about redesigning parts of the OSD, and got answered this. That's why I asked, because I was rejected. (I do the replace in my variant of the X.net)
I will interestedly watch how Microsoft gets many C-ash for the non-ECMA-standartized classes and the Mono (and dotGNU, eventually) developers can't keep up with this, and so M$ gets much out of their (actually working).NET/Win32 and probably for Win64. Then they start selling.NET/Linux (or.NET/Posix, anyone?) and it actually sells. Closed-source, of course. Being able to run Mono apps, too.
Look at what the WINE people have done since nearly one decade, they start with the Win3.1 API IIRC, and they aren't at 1.0 yet. The more recent (2000-2002) WINE don't even run on OpenBSD, as they need some proprietary kernel stuff and depend on ELF being the executable format.
I didn't try gpg because I don't want to learn Just Another Command-Line Interface(TM), but what I can say on PGP:
Do not use any versions other than
* pgp-2.6.3-ia
* pgp-2.6.3-in The latter is a modificated version of
pgp-2.6.3-i made by the German IN-CA (Certification Authority) and supports more.
Both use IDEA/RSA though, so be sure to get an IDEA license additionally (they are available from Ascom Tech, CH - check pgpdoc2.txt). The source and RSA are freely available nowadays, you can also use the NON-US version.
* Free Software is OSI approved Open Source
* the FSF approved documentation (GFDL)
is NOT because OSI doesn't approve
documentation licenses (a pity).
Although not very politely expressed, I must say I agree with you on this. de Icaza could have made this very differently, and saved him much trouble - and the GNOME project hasn't a good reputation either, in relation to e.g. KDE.
Anyways, he might have been better a Microsoft(R) employee.
He can criticize any particular GNU project because he leads the GNU project as a whole. Be content with it or not, but you can't change the facts. Of course you can fork, the [L]GPL allows this.
Please note, as you can read from my other comments on this, I am no GPL fan either.
First, check your spelling. Then point those "internal things" out.
Third, are you really aware of the difference between "Open Source" - http://opensource.org and "Free Software" - http://www.fsf.org
The current licenses used by the free software movement (GPL, LGPL, GFDL etc.) are, as long as they refer to software and not, for example, documentation (as the GFDL), are "OSI Compliant Open Source" with regards to the open source definition, and so free software qualifies as open source. That the OSI is not approving non-software licenses is really a pity.
No, he is not lying. The "free software movement" based upon the GPL, LGPL, GFDL etc. and started by GNU is very different from the Open Source movement started by Bruce Evans? Anyway, the latter you can inform you about at http://opensource.org The former at http://www.fsf.org
FSF is the Free Software Foundation, which is the nowadays' head of the GNU project, the GNU licenses and non-GNU projects that are under the [L]GPL and hosted by them but do not belong to the GNU project as a whole.
RMS is head of the GNU project and the FSF, so I think he is right to decide which direction the GNU project follows, although I am not, in my PERSONAL opinion, happy with this line. Take the Gnu Compiler Collection (GCC) as an example: http://gcc.gnu.org The Copyright lines in the Copyleft license (sigh!) refer to the FSF as owner. If you want any of your changes be committed into gcc you MUST transfer your copyright on these changes to the FSF, which then, in turn, incorporates them under the current GPL (or LGPL, for example in the glibc, but I don't know if this practice is there, too). These are because then the FSF can be sure that no third party copyright owner can claim anything about such core projects as the gcc. For example, if the GPL would prove invalid in court, the FSF would change the GCC license from one day to another to a protective one. As I said, *personally* I am no GNU fan and do use a modificated MIT/X/BSD license for my projects, but on the other hand I am glad that RMS started things such as the gcc that early. Credits to whom credits belong.
That's what I wanted to express, too. I personally use the MIT (to be exact, an X.net-style) license, but _if_ you were to restrict any further I'd go to LGPL v2.0
Note you can LGPL your programmes by two different means: Either you say
this is LGPL, v2 or any later Or you say
this is LGPL v2.0
In the latter case (I'd prefer) RMS exactly does _NOT_ have the right to change your licensing. (However you would have to stay with these terms for quite a long time...)
Changing from GPL to LGPL, off-topic but interesting too, is possible. Only for the copyright owners.
If they chose the LGPL, there still would be the issue whether to choose v2.0 or v2.1 The latter is called "Lesser" instead of "Library" and calls itself deprecated due to RMS objections on non-GPL software. Yes, read non-GPL, not non-open, not even non-free. RMS wrote the GPL to exactly achieve the aim that all software has to be free as in GPL, and so he invented (or copied?) the viral/tainting thing.
Actually, RMS leads the GNU project, and GNOME is the desktop of the GNU project.
Isn't is right that a project leader can ask a head programmer of a subproject to explain himself, just as a corporation manager must explain himself once yearly to the shareholders?
Thanks for the info, I have OpenBSD, but I don't know about the paper size. Is 30.48x21 cm any "standard" size (letter,...)? As for the printer driver, I'll have a look at it.
I won't upgrade to a newer printer as I always am cared of those plastic devices that they go defect, and I can't afford the ink either. Only if I had money I would use a Tektronix wax printer. I dislike Laser and especially Inkjet.
Usually, I don't even need X11. But some people do need, and I probably sometimes want to view some web site images, too. (Browsing still using lynx, but xv then.)
Currently I use icewm, but _if_ *step runs on my box I'll now that I heard of it probably give it a shot. Earlier I admired NeXT boxen. Mac OS X is said to be good (never really seen one, though). But X11 is just plain slow. Ok, it's designed for networking, but it anyways sucks.
If this gets me Display Postscript or some similar thing (I read the earlier GNUstep story a month or so ago), it be glad. However I cannot even print under *nix - I only own a 1982'er Epson FX-80 needle printer. Is it supported, somehow, somewhere? (ghostscript?) Also the paper size (30.48x21 cm) is a problem.
I'm not sure whether
Theo de Raadt
or
Theo deRaadt
I've seen both, and the latter being used
more oftenly.
The "de" is a Sir's predicate (I don't know
the exact English expression for it) and in
several countries it's separated,
but it also can count as part of the name.
Please enlighten me, Theo;)
By the way: I call OpenBSD's version of
The Daemon (beastie;) Theo.
Check: http://www.openbsd.org/images/newhead.jpg
And why the... does OpenBSD not currently
have this feature?
Comparing dmesg gave me a 1.2MB (instead of
4.something) for my 24MB firewall+fileserver+
webserver box (now it doesn't crash due to
OOM so frequently).
But this is error-prone and badly extendible.
Ok, this was about linux, sorry guys, but the
only Linux I found suitable was 2.0
2.4 has too many bugs, maybe it'll get better
with time. 2.2 was never in discussion.
For the cases I use Linux I got my self-made
distro from 1999 and use it. Yeah, libc5 rocks
(I optimise for size) and I found the Linux-
from-scratch HOWTO later, when it was fully done
and burnt to CD.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but compare with what I said, and you won't
find major differences.
Note that _any_ free software is open source as
to the OSD (http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html).
I didn't say it was incorrect.
Oops, sorry for my misquoting.
As to the non-software-not-certifying,
I asked why not to replace "software" by
"work" in the thread about redesigning parts
of the OSD, and got answered this.
That's why I asked, because I was rejected.
(I do the replace in my variant of the X.net)
Yup. He, like Theo de Raadt, Darren Reed,
Dan Bernstein, is a man with principles.
And he holds on.
I will interestedly watch how Microsoft gets .NET/Win32 and .NET/Linux (or .NET/Posix,
many C-ash for the non-ECMA-standartized classes
and the Mono (and dotGNU, eventually) developers
can't keep up with this, and so M$ gets much
out of their (actually working)
probably for Win64.
Then they start selling
anyone?) and it actually sells. Closed-source,
of course. Being able to run Mono apps, too.
Look at what the WINE people have done since nearly
one decade, they start with the Win3.1 API IIRC,
and they aren't at 1.0 yet.
The more recent (2000-2002) WINE don't even run on
OpenBSD, as they need some proprietary kernel stuff
and depend on ELF being the executable format.
I didn't try gpg because I don't want to
learn Just Another Command-Line Interface(TM),
but what I can say on PGP:
Do not use any versions other than
* pgp-2.6.3-ia
* pgp-2.6.3-in
The latter is a modificated version of
pgp-2.6.3-i made by the German IN-CA
(Certification Authority) and supports more.
Both use IDEA/RSA though, so be sure to get
an IDEA license additionally (they are available
from Ascom Tech, CH - check pgpdoc2.txt).
The source and RSA are freely available nowadays,
you can also use the NON-US version.
Things like this belong into the .sig, too.
Meta-Slashdot thread found in CmdrTaco's
Journal (IIRC).
Check my
They are not equivalent, but:
* Free Software is OSI approved Open Source
* the FSF approved documentation (GFDL)
is NOT because OSI doesn't approve
documentation licenses (a pity).
Although not very politely expressed, I must
say I agree with you on this.
de Icaza could have made this very differently,
and saved him much trouble - and the GNOME project
hasn't a good reputation either, in relation to
e.g. KDE.
Anyways, he might have been better a Microsoft(R)
employee.
If "RMS" would be a topic(TM), you could
filter it in your preferences page.
Anyways, you can just filter GNU.
Oh wait... you aren't logged in?
D'oh.
He can criticize any particular GNU project
because he leads the GNU project as a whole.
Be content with it or not, but you can't
change the facts.
Of course you can fork, the [L]GPL allows this.
Please note, as you can read from my other
comments on this, I am no GPL fan either.
First, check your spelling.
Then point those "internal things" out.
Third, are you really aware of the difference
between "Open Source" - http://opensource.org
and "Free Software" - http://www.fsf.org
The current licenses used by the free software
movement (GPL, LGPL, GFDL etc.) are, as long
as they refer to software and not, for example,
documentation (as the GFDL), are "OSI Compliant
Open Source" with regards to the open source
definition, and so free software qualifies as
open source.
That the OSI is not approving non-software
licenses is really a pity.
No, he is not lying.
The "free software movement" based upon the
GPL, LGPL, GFDL etc. and started by GNU is
very different from the Open Source movement
started by Bruce Evans?
Anyway, the latter you can inform you about
at http://opensource.org
The former at http://www.fsf.org
FSF is the Free Software Foundation, which is
the nowadays' head of the GNU project, the
GNU licenses and non-GNU projects that are
under the [L]GPL and hosted by them but do not
belong to the GNU project as a whole.
RMS is head of the GNU project and the FSF,
so I think he is right to decide which direction
the GNU project follows, although I am not, in
my PERSONAL opinion, happy with this line.
Take the Gnu Compiler Collection (GCC) as an
example: http://gcc.gnu.org
The Copyright lines in the Copyleft license
(sigh!) refer to the FSF as owner.
If you want any of your changes be committed
into gcc you MUST transfer your copyright on
these changes to the FSF, which then, in turn,
incorporates them under the current GPL (or LGPL,
for example in the glibc, but I don't know if
this practice is there, too).
These are because then the FSF can be sure that
no third party copyright owner can claim anything
about such core projects as the gcc. For example,
if the GPL would prove invalid in court, the FSF
would change the GCC license from one day to
another to a protective one.
As I said, *personally* I am no GNU fan and do
use a modificated MIT/X/BSD license for my projects,
but on the other hand I am glad that RMS started
things such as the gcc that early.
Credits to whom credits belong.
That's what I wanted to express, too.
I personally use the MIT (to be exact, an
X.net-style) license, but _if_ you were to
restrict any further I'd go to LGPL v2.0
Note you can LGPL your programmes by two
different means:
Either you say
this is LGPL, v2 or any later
Or you say
this is LGPL v2.0
In the latter case (I'd prefer) RMS exactly
does _NOT_ have the right to change your
licensing. (However you would have to stay
with these terms for quite a long time...)
Changing from GPL to LGPL, off-topic but interesting
too, is possible. Only for the copyright owners.
If they chose the LGPL, there still would be the
issue whether to choose v2.0 or v2.1
The latter is called "Lesser" instead of "Library"
and calls itself deprecated due to RMS objections
on non-GPL software.
Yes, read non-GPL, not non-open, not even non-free.
RMS wrote the GPL to exactly achieve the aim that
all software has to be free as in GPL, and so he
invented (or copied?) the viral/tainting thing.
/me votes for MIT or LGPLv2.0
Actually, RMS leads the GNU project,
and GNOME is the desktop of the GNU project.
Isn't is right that a project leader can ask
a head programmer of a subproject to explain
himself, just as a corporation manager must
explain himself once yearly to the shareholders?
(Not a RMS fan either, but this is just ok)
Thanks for the info, I have OpenBSD, but I don't ...)?
;)
know about the paper size. Is 30.48x21 cm any
"standard" size (letter,
As for the printer driver, I'll have a look at it.
I won't upgrade to a newer printer as I always am
cared of those plastic devices that they go defect,
and I can't afford the ink either.
Only if I had money I would use a Tektronix wax
printer. I dislike Laser and especially Inkjet.
My printer is rock solid
Ok, thanks, but how I circumvent those?
wm2 is ok. But...
Anyways, the network architecture is slow,
eg. compared to Win32 local architecture.
goodn8
Usually, I don't even need X11.
But some people do need, and I probably
sometimes want to view some web site images,
too. (Browsing still using lynx, but xv then.)
Currently I use icewm, but _if_ *step runs on
my box I'll now that I heard of it probably give
it a shot.
Earlier I admired NeXT boxen. Mac OS X is said
to be good (never really seen one, though).
But X11 is just plain slow. Ok, it's designed
for networking, but it anyways sucks.
If this gets me Display Postscript or some similar
thing (I read the earlier GNUstep story a month or
so ago), it be glad.
However I cannot even print under *nix - I only
own a 1982'er Epson FX-80 needle printer.
Is it supported, somehow, somewhere? (ghostscript?)
Also the paper size (30.48x21 cm) is a problem.
Ok, give my
wget
lynx
links
w3m
javascript, please.
Thank you.
He spoke of the contents of the archive
(which I until now didn't really know of).
He said there was much of asr in it.
Now I wanted to know about dasr.
Understood? I didn't reply to the question,
ok, but I asked an on-topic question myself.
Duh.
beginthis is an attachment.txt.exe
foo
bar
end
this text OjE can display again
Looks as you'd forgot two spaces.
Hehe... they even change the VM system during
a stable.
Some weeks after I stopped reading linux-kernel.
I know that I'll never go back.
Ok, mod me down for expressing my opinion.
I don't like Linux, but for technical reasons.
I wonder whether de.asr is also digested somewhere...
/. I know)
If you know of it, please point me to it. Thanks
(Although most of dasr prefer not to read
I'm not sure whether
;)
;) Theo.
Theo de Raadt
or
Theo deRaadt
I've seen both, and the latter being used
more oftenly.
The "de" is a Sir's predicate (I don't know
the exact English expression for it) and in
several countries it's separated,
but it also can count as part of the name.
Please enlighten me, Theo
By the way: I call OpenBSD's version of
The Daemon (beastie
Check: http://www.openbsd.org/images/newhead.jpg
And why the ... does OpenBSD not currently
have this feature?
Comparing dmesg gave me a 1.2MB (instead of
4.something) for my 24MB firewall+fileserver+
webserver box (now it doesn't crash due to
OOM so frequently).
But this is error-prone and badly extendible.
Ok, this was about linux, sorry guys, but the
only Linux I found suitable was 2.0
2.4 has too many bugs, maybe it'll get better
with time. 2.2 was never in discussion.
For the cases I use Linux I got my self-made
distro from 1999 and use it. Yeah, libc5 rocks
(I optimise for size) and I found the Linux-
from-scratch HOWTO later, when it was fully done
and burnt to CD.