ftp.cdrom.com is frequently that way. Some cynical part of my mind claims they must inflate the user number, but I have no evidence for that, nor do I really believe that.
Rational? I wouldn't say that...
on
RMS on APSL
·
· Score: 1
He pointed out it's unfair *like* the NPL. He did not say that stopped it from being open source. He specificaly mentioned the APSL and NPL as having similar problems that didn't make them non-free.
As for disrespect for privacy, name the licenses that have been accepted as open-source that require you to notify someone. I know Debian turns them away frequently as non-free.
As for it being incompatible with the GPL, that is a practical problem, even if it originates in the GPL. When I use the OS Kit (which derives partially from Linux) to build an operating system, I will be unable to use any Darwin code. It's annoying.
Oh, yeah, and they'd rue the day that one of the technically-challenged reporters covering Linux accidentally installs it on two computers, and discovers X is network-transparent.
Right. Accidently. The Unix-Haters handbook has this right - xauth et la is a pain; no one is ever going to accidently discover X is network transparent.
First, he said nothing about races. He did treat Europe unfairly, but that's not a racial issue.
Second, the original poster complained about the poor priorities of European buisnessmen. You turn around and call all Americans (singling out Slashdot readers) bigots and racists. I would say the latter is much more discriminatory and sterotyping than the first.
Well, as an anonymous coward, letting no one know it was you won't be hard. Sure, I'd like to see it. Might even hack a new front-end (GPL'ed), if it's technically superior.
Irrelevant. Children are linguistic geniuses - they're basically hard-wired to pick up languages. If you want to compare the time the average adult takes to pick a new natural language to programing language, that's different.
I'm taking a one credit hour Fortran class. For real ability, I'd probably need another one credit hour class on the subject, or the equivelent. People take five hour courses on human languages, and aren't even considered as knowing the basics yet. Full competence in a human language is probably 20-25 credit hours, at least.
The author of G77, Craig Burley, has talked frequently about how he never would have written a free Fortran compiler under something other than the GPL. When I write proprietary stuff, I expect to get paid for it, he says.
It's nice to say "another compiler would be", but you need authors. Free BSD's still don't have a compiler they consider free (i.e. BSD/X-free style license.) Why is that, if it's so easy to replace the compiler.
Compiler isn't all that matters. The BSD's don't run GNU utilities, except where there is no replacement - i.e. GCC, GDB, and emacs (for the emacs addicts.) Anything GPL'ed they actively try to replace with BSD'ed stuff.
Why not? While it may not be found in the dictionary, it's a lot more likely to be understood than many words in the dictionary. And isn't that what writing is about, being understood?
Do realize that RMS doesn't buy that argument. If you try to write programs with QT and GPL-ed FSF'owned code, you may be in for a lawsuit, or at least many complaints, no matter what distribution you run.
Well, yes. If you have programs compiled against 12 different versions of GTK, then you need 12 different GTK libraries. If you're unhappy with that, stick with Slink (which has only 1.0 & 1.1.3) or wait until everything's recompiled against 1.2. Don't trash Potato for being alpha.
The distribution fragmentation is actaully a good thing in some ways. Debian suits those who love free software and who want to help with making a distribution. Redhat has ease of use for beginners and a strong corporate backing. Slackware is good for those who want to be able to mess with the entire system. Stampede is good if you want something that will take full advantage of the Pentium. Etc.
As for forcing the distrubtion guys to do stuff, there is the Filesystem standard and what not. OTOH, part of the point is freedom. Each group tweaks its own system like it wants to, for whatever reason it wants to. That's part of the freedom everyone talks about; freedom to innovate, freedom to design and freedom to change.
Just because a beta version of Debian has a broken install that is being fixed before release, you judge Debian. Right. You know, if you use Solaris or something else propriatary, you won't have to hear about beta versions, or be threatened by the concept that they might be out there.
Sued by who? GPL Binary Only RULES!
on
VA Going Bigtime
·
· Score: 1
Interesting. NeXT and their lawyers seemed to disagree.
Someone mentioned not running X in ZDNet's discussion, too. I don't understand what the complaint is. You're comparing them under real-life conditions, and Linux servers rarely run X in real-life conditions. OTOH, you can't turn off NT's graphics under real-life situations.
ACLU takes on a small fraction of the cases its asked to. Just because they can't carry a case means nothing. The CDA was different because it was a major, blatant case they had to take a stand on.
The ACLU does get involved in cases where Christians were discrimentated against. I don't know how many cases they've got involved with where Christians _as Christians_ were being discriminated against.
Part of the reason probably is limited resources. A Christian can often rely on the donations of thousands of churchs and several groups such as the Rutherford Institute and the Christian Coalition. Why should ACLU spend its limited funds getting involved?
The CDA could have gotten you arrested for making these indecent comments in a public forum. (Well, in theory). The ACLU fought that law so you could have the right to post stupid indecent comments in a public forum.
The only thing that's going to change what gets used is people actually changing the formats. If you don't want to see more gif's, use png's for all your pages. Most browsers support them (well, IE 4, Netscape 4 and Mozilla, plus any browser that uses external image softwear.)
The only reason the default configuration of egcs would install over gcc is when gcc was in/usr/local. If gcc is in/usr/local for whatever reason, configure --prefix=/usr/local/egcs and add simlinks to put stuff in the path as egcc or whatever.
> The Unix error defect could have been as high as > 60% and still parrelled that of Linux.
That's absurd. Think about. In pratical use, it's how often it fails for you. 60% is unusuable. Linux's bugs are far from making it unusable. While his comparison based on lines of code may make sense to him, it doesn't make any sense to me.
Slashdot Mirror
ftp.cdrom.com is frequently that way. Some cynical part of my mind claims they must inflate the user number, but I have no evidence for that, nor do I really believe that.
He pointed out it's unfair *like* the NPL. He did not say that stopped it from being open source. He specificaly mentioned the APSL and NPL as having similar problems that didn't make them non-free.
As for disrespect for privacy, name the licenses that have been accepted as open-source that require you to notify someone. I know Debian turns them away frequently as non-free.
As for it being incompatible with the GPL, that is a practical problem, even if it originates in the GPL. When I use the OS Kit (which derives partially from Linux) to build an operating system, I will be unable to use any Darwin code. It's annoying.
Arggh! Get an account, and turn Katz off. Stop complaining and do something.
Oh, yeah, and they'd rue the day that one of the technically-challenged reporters covering Linux accidentally installs it on two computers, and discovers X is network-transparent.
Right. Accidently. The Unix-Haters handbook has this right - xauth et la is a pain; no one is ever going to accidently discover X is network transparent.
First, he said nothing about races. He did treat Europe unfairly, but that's not a racial issue.
Second, the original poster complained about the poor priorities of European buisnessmen. You turn around and call all Americans (singling out Slashdot readers) bigots and racists. I would say the latter is much more discriminatory and sterotyping than the first.
Well, as an anonymous coward, letting no one know it was you won't be hard. Sure, I'd like to see it. Might even hack a new front-end (GPL'ed), if it's technically superior.
Friday, Nov. 20: I own how many O'Reilly animal books.
Irrelevant. Children are linguistic geniuses - they're basically hard-wired to pick up languages. If you want to compare the time the average adult takes to pick a new natural language to programing language, that's different.
I'm taking a one credit hour Fortran class. For real ability, I'd probably need another one credit hour class on the subject, or the equivelent. People take five hour courses on human languages, and aren't even considered as knowing the basics yet. Full competence in a human language is probably 20-25 credit hours, at least.
The author of G77, Craig Burley, has talked frequently about how he never would have written a free Fortran compiler under something other than the GPL. When I write proprietary stuff, I expect to get paid for it, he says.
It's nice to say "another compiler would be", but you need authors. Free BSD's still don't have a compiler they consider free (i.e. BSD/X-free style license.) Why is that, if it's so easy to replace the compiler.
Compiler isn't all that matters. The BSD's don't run GNU utilities, except where there is no replacement - i.e. GCC, GDB, and emacs (for the emacs addicts.) Anything GPL'ed they actively try to replace with BSD'ed stuff.
Why not? While it may not be found in the dictionary, it's a lot more likely to be understood than many words in the dictionary. And isn't that what writing is about, being understood?
Do realize that RMS doesn't buy that argument. If you try to write programs with QT and GPL-ed FSF'owned code, you may be in for a lawsuit, or at least many complaints, no matter what distribution you run.
Well, yes. If you have programs compiled against 12 different versions of GTK, then you need 12 different GTK libraries. If you're unhappy with that, stick with Slink (which has only 1.0 & 1.1.3) or wait until everything's recompiled against 1.2. Don't trash Potato for being alpha.
Blackbox is also Gnome-aware. I believe several other window managers either have it or are working on it.
The distribution fragmentation is actaully a good thing in some ways. Debian suits those who love free software and who want to help with making a distribution. Redhat has ease of use for beginners and a strong corporate backing. Slackware is good for those who want to be able to mess with the entire system. Stampede is good if you want something that will take full advantage of the Pentium. Etc.
As for forcing the distrubtion guys to do stuff, there is the Filesystem standard and what not. OTOH, part of the point is freedom. Each group tweaks its own system like it wants to, for whatever reason it wants to. That's part of the freedom everyone talks about; freedom to innovate, freedom to design and freedom to change.
Just because a beta version of Debian has a broken install that is being fixed before release, you judge Debian. Right. You know, if you use Solaris or something else propriatary, you won't have to hear about beta versions, or be threatened by the concept that they might be out there.
Interesting. NeXT and their lawyers seemed to disagree.
Someone mentioned not running X in ZDNet's discussion, too. I don't understand what the complaint is. You're comparing them under real-life conditions, and Linux servers rarely run X in real-life conditions. OTOH, you can't turn off NT's graphics under real-life situations.
I understand Blitz++ has been massively improved under egcs 1.1.1.
ACLU takes on a small fraction of the cases its asked to. Just because they can't carry a case means nothing. The CDA was different because it was a major, blatant case they had to take a stand on.
The ACLU does get involved in cases where Christians were discrimentated against. I don't know how many cases they've got involved with where Christians _as Christians_ were being discriminated against.
Part of the reason probably is limited resources. A Christian can often rely on the donations of thousands of churchs and several groups such as the Rutherford Institute and the Christian Coalition. Why should ACLU spend its limited funds getting involved?
The CDA could have gotten you arrested for making these indecent comments in a public forum. (Well, in theory). The ACLU fought that law so you could have the right to post stupid indecent comments in a public forum.
The only thing that's going to change what gets used is people actually changing the formats. If you don't want to see more gif's, use png's for all your pages. Most browsers support them (well, IE 4, Netscape 4 and Mozilla, plus any browser that uses external image softwear.)
The only reason the default configuration of egcs would install over gcc is when gcc was in /usr/local. If gcc is in /usr/local for whatever reason, configure --prefix=/usr/local/egcs and add simlinks to put stuff in the path as egcc or whatever.
> The Unix error defect could have been as high as
> 60% and still parrelled that of Linux.
That's absurd. Think about. In pratical use, it's how often it fails for you. 60% is unusuable. Linux's bugs are far from making it unusable. While his comparison based on lines of code may make sense to him, it doesn't make any sense to me.