What fractured mess is linux? I only see one official tree avilable at ftp.kernel.org. Am I missing something?
Normally (unless they are following the FSF standard of GNU/Linux, in which case Linux means just the kernel) when someone mentions Linux they are talking about the Operating System, not just the kernel. If this is NOT the case, then you need to try and convince the media of this. And yes, there is way more distributions (ie operating systems) of Linux (the OS) than there is of BSD.
Plus, on any of the BSDs systems (even old ones like SunOS < 5.0), I can expect certain utilities to be located in a certain place. The hier.7 the man page has been around for a LONG TIME.
Is there another GPL license, apart from the GPL and LGPL that I can choose from?
Nope, not unless you count the knockoffs. Which you seem to do...
Yup. And its just an example of what's wrong with the original, normal, BSD license. Not one of it's hacked up variants.
What is wrong with what? The fact that the original 4 clause license won't let you take my code and GPL it?
There are only two BSDL (UCB defines the BSD license). The original 4 clause license (includes advertising notice) and the more recent 3 clause license that deletes the advertising notice requirement.
Of course, unlike the commercial people, I'm nice and wouldn't sell my newly GPLed BSD-based software.
I don't care if you sell my code or not. And BTW, I can take your GPL'ed code and sell it just fine as long as I include the source to any binaries... I can charge $1,000 for GCC if I want.
But I don't have to be that nice -- I could be like MS and rip off the hard efforts of the BSD team!
Unless someone is stupid, it's not the hard to just rip off ANY code that has source available and just file off the serial numbers (ie change function names, rewrite comments, etc, etc,). The bulk of the code is the same, just the identifing marks have been removed. Unless your code is VERY hard to come by, you'll never know it.
And if people are stupid enough to not to protect themselves against commercial entities taking their code with recompense then they deserve what they get. As a businessman, I don't feel bad at all for someone who forces their own raw deal on themselves.
Huh??? I'm not worried about commericial entities taking my code (if I was I would not be using the BSDL). What I don't like is some jerk forking my code just to put it under the GPL instead of contribing back to the original project. If your not willing to use the original license then don't use my code... simple.
Kudos to you for using a different than standard BSD license. Just like BSD model itself, even the licensing is a fractured mess
Different than standard? I just happen to use the original 4 clause instead of the 3 clause BSDL. They are both standard. And again, fractured? There are only two of them...
All BSD code is also GPL code (or any other license, by definition).
Not if they use the 4 clause BSDL.
Simply insta-fork it every time it comes out. Problem solved. Everyone wins, especially the GPL guys if they make improvements, since they can't be back-ported to the BSD version.
So, you just want the ability to take the code and not give back to the project? Sounds just like the compliants the GPL guys use aginst the commericial people... hummmm....
Why the widespread objections to MSN Messenger or MediaPlayer being pre-installed?
Because these are areas that MS is trying enter by leveraging their monopoly. Without Windows, MS would not have a snowballs' chance in hell of getting into either messaging or media.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but since the BSD license is listed as being [1 [gnu.org]] "GPL Compatible" by the FSF, you could take the kernel, redistribute under the BSD license, then make your changes and redistribute again with a mere mention of "Thanks to..."
It is only the 3 clause BSDL that is compatiable aka "can be taken"; The 4 clause (aka the advertising clause) is not compatiable.
What they mean is that you can "take" 3 clause BSDL code, modify it and place it under the GPL. That is the only reason why I use the 4 clause BSDL on my code. I don't want people relicensing it. If you want to hack on my code and redistribute, then you need to use the SAME license I do, the BSDL.
The DBM/PostgreSQL interaction was a nasty variable suicide from the looks, if I opened a dbm file, the PostgreSQL handle would die. Reported the bug and stopped using PHP... If you've ever looked at the PHP source code (this was 2 years ago, it might be better now), then you know what I went through when I tried to find the bug myself... Arrrggghhh It's not quite as bad as the Sun Java VM code, but then again I've never seen anything else like the VM code...
PHP is fine for what it was intended for, but I think trying to bring it out of the web server is not going to work too well...:)
Have you ever seen the source code to Java 1.4.1? Anyone who can hack that code can just about hack anything. It's a mish-mash of assembler/C/C++ and the way it's written... Arrrgghhh. Not pretty.
Just opening it would not help much until they got it factored enough to get it readable/understandable.
The only reason I even know this is because I compile the FreeBSD patch versions...
The one time I tried to write an enterprise (ok, only 3 machines excluding DB server), I ran into everything from a decent lack of modularity (how about decent libraries with no GLOBALS?); Cron job? Use lynx to hit a webpage (yes there is a cli version now...); bad interactions between code segments (trying to use DBM files and PostgreSQL at the same time) and decent JIT tech.
Sure, for small sites I use Perl (either standalone or mod_perl), but was it gets bigger I head to Java.
For a real challenge write me a desktop app in PHP that will run unedited on Unix and MS... I can do it both in Java and Perl (and have done so).
If you haven't patched PostgreSQL within the last 6 months you are vulnerable to multiple buffer overflow/remote root exploits.
remote root???? Just about EVERY postgresql system runs as a normal user, how the hell do you get root out of that?
By default postgresql does NOT even support IP connections, you have to turn it on by either the -i option to postmaster or in the config file.
I think your looking at the Mordred buffer overflows from about 5 months ago. ALL of these require a valid user account to exploit. NONE were remote. Please post the location/posting of a REMOTE for a recent release of PostgreSQL. Versions 6.X, 7.1.X and 7.2.0 do count.
I would think that the disclaimer of IP would only hold on contributions FROM SCO. What I mean is that the disclaimer would only hold for code that they had contributed to the Kernel/System. If someone else had violated their IP by contributing code, there is NO way that the infringer can grant a license to the vioated IP.
How about working FKs? I mean if I can drop an entire table that FKs pointing it, not much intergerity is there? On a different note, has anyone done a decent set of benchmarks comparing MySQL with transactions to PostgreSQL? That would be nice to see.
BSD was sort of forked from SVRx, but had every single piece of code rewritten by the folks at berkley.
Huh? Go and check your Unix history. When Berkeley got their first license for Unix, there was NO SysV. Version 7 ( and 32V for the VAX) Unix is what BSD is based on. Here is a nice little chart of the Unix bloodlines.
Time to learn how to use cvsup...:) Hit google up for it.
BWP
Re:Death before dis' Honor.
on
War of Honor
·
· Score: 2
You may be thinking of where she challenged the professional duelist to a duel (as revenge) and won. It wasn't so much skill, though she is portrayed as being competition level, but the fact that her bionic eye (and presumably fairly obvious targetting software) let her make shots that would have been impossible for a non-cyborg.
Both this duel and the second one (where she kills Pavel Young), happened way BEFORE she lost her arm and eye. Both of them were lost when she was on Hell, which was two books ago, the duels happened about the 4 book.
That said, some of the reasons she won the duels was the fact that she was a genie (engineered DNA), she was a heavy worlder, and was competion level in both Coup de Vitasse and pistol. Not to mention the way she forged her fear and rage (love?) into a weapon.
And BTW, just because some has been studying something longer, does NOT make them more skilled. It is obvious during the sword duel that Steadholder Burkett(sp) had been studying sword for awhile, but only saw it as a physical workout instead of a combined mental/physical discpline. That combined with the, at the time, Grayson male superiority, let him loose that one.
Well if your willing to give up the CD-ROM, then just purchase the book from baen in electronic format. Webscription is where you can do it. I was able to buy about 2 days before it hit the newsstands. Price is about $6 or $7.
Public Domain software is not really Free, because someone can stop its Freedom by putting a nasty license on it.
Ahhh... this is a strawman, the same that is used with the BSDL flamefests.
Even if I grab a piece of PD software, make a couple of changes and slap MY license on to it, the original is STILL PD! They have taken nothing from YOU except the ability to use their changes. Which when you think about it, makes since. They did the work, NOT you.
Just like when "Evil Empire"(R) grabs a piece of BSDL software, hacks the hell out of it and then sells it. The original is still BSDL and you still have access to it. Why should you care if someone wishes to release under a PD or BSDL license? The only reason why I release under the BSDL is that, one, I want credit, and two, I want the little protection of the disclaimer.
BTW, I've released software written by me, under both PD (early stuff) and BSDL (later stuff). I have also contributed patches to GPL'ed projects under the GPL. My choice... NO ONE elses!
Whether the Kde League is a non-profit or a not-for-profit (they are the same thing, in US law), they have to release their financial information - it's not up to them to decide if they want to release the information.
It all depends on the state. On the other hand, if a corp is IRS tax-exmpt, then they HAVE to release it. You can be non-profit without being tax exempt.
I help run a Texas non-profit corp that is not IRS tax-exempt (fraternal org). By our bylaws (but not state or federal law) we are required to release all accounting data to our members.
All a non-profit corp means is that there is no passive income (e.g. dividends) paid to any stockholder. All income has to be used only for corp purposes. Tax exempt on the other hand means that you have to provide some benefit to society, releases you from having to pay taxes on any income, fall under the disclosure laws.
The funny thing is why did they NOT go for the IRS tax exempt status? It is not that hard to get (takes a little while though) and has benefits to boot (ie donations are tax decductiable).
Sure, Solaris may have more users, but is it a BSD system? OSF/1? Digital Unix? What I mean is if I know only BSD systems, will I be comfortable on them? I never was... I've used Digital Unix, SCO Unix, AT&T SysVr4 amoung others, BSD they are not.
Just becuase something contains BSD code does NOT make them a BSD system... All of the above OSs have a VERY DISTINCT SysV feel to them. Sure I might be able to get BSD semantics out of the userland, but...
Slashdot Mirror
What fractured mess is linux? I only see one official tree avilable at ftp.kernel.org. Am I missing something?
Normally (unless they are following the FSF standard of GNU/Linux, in which case Linux means just the kernel) when someone mentions Linux they are talking about the Operating System, not just the kernel. If this is NOT the case, then you need to try and convince the media of this. And yes, there is way more distributions (ie operating systems) of Linux (the OS) than there is of BSD.
Plus, on any of the BSDs systems (even old ones like SunOS < 5.0), I can expect certain utilities to be located in a certain place. The hier.7 the man page has been around for a LONG TIME.
Is there another GPL license, apart from the GPL and LGPL that I can choose from?
Nope, not unless you count the knockoffs. Which you seem to do...
BWP
Yup. And its just an example of what's wrong with the original, normal, BSD license. Not one of it's hacked up variants.
What is wrong with what? The fact that the original 4 clause license won't let you take my code and GPL it?
There are only two BSDL (UCB defines the BSD license). The original 4 clause license (includes advertising notice) and the more recent 3 clause license that deletes the advertising notice requirement.
Of course, unlike the commercial people, I'm nice and wouldn't sell my newly GPLed BSD-based software.
I don't care if you sell my code or not. And BTW, I can take your GPL'ed code and sell it just fine as long as I include the source to any binaries... I can charge $1,000 for GCC if I want.
But I don't have to be that nice -- I could be like MS and rip off the hard efforts of the BSD team!
Unless someone is stupid, it's not the hard to just rip off ANY code that has source available and just file off the serial numbers (ie change function names, rewrite comments, etc, etc,). The bulk of the code is the same, just the identifing marks have been removed. Unless your code is VERY hard to come by, you'll never know it.
And if people are stupid enough to not to protect themselves against commercial entities taking their code with recompense then they deserve what they get. As a businessman, I don't feel bad at all for someone who forces their own raw deal on themselves.
Huh??? I'm not worried about commericial entities taking my code (if I was I would not be using the BSDL). What I don't like is some jerk forking my code just to put it under the GPL instead of contribing back to the original project. If your not willing to use the original license then don't use my code... simple.
Kudos to you for using a different than standard BSD license. Just like BSD model itself, even the licensing is a fractured mess
Different than standard? I just happen to use the original 4 clause instead of the 3 clause BSDL. They are both standard. And again, fractured? There are only two of them...
BWP
All BSD code is also GPL code (or any other license, by definition).
Not if they use the 4 clause BSDL.
Simply insta-fork it every time it comes out. Problem solved. Everyone wins, especially the GPL guys if they make improvements, since they can't be back-ported to the BSD version.
So, you just want the ability to take the code and not give back to the project? Sounds just like the compliants the GPL guys use aginst the commericial people... hummmm....
And people wonder why I use the 4 clause BSDL...
BWP
Why the widespread objections to MSN Messenger or MediaPlayer being pre-installed?
Because these are areas that MS is trying enter by leveraging their monopoly. Without Windows, MS would not have a snowballs' chance in hell of getting into either messaging or media.
Thats why.
BWP
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but since the BSD license is listed as being [1 [gnu.org]] "GPL Compatible" by the FSF, you could take the kernel, redistribute under the BSD license, then make your changes and redistribute again with a mere mention of "Thanks to ..."
It is only the 3 clause BSDL that is compatiable aka "can be taken"; The 4 clause (aka the advertising clause) is not compatiable.
What they mean is that you can "take" 3 clause BSDL code, modify it and place it under the GPL. That is the only reason why I use the 4 clause BSDL on my code. I don't want people relicensing it. If you want to hack on my code and redistribute, then you need to use the SAME license I do, the BSDL.
BWP
The DBM/PostgreSQL interaction was a nasty variable suicide from the looks, if I opened a dbm file, the PostgreSQL handle would die. Reported the bug and stopped using PHP...
If you've ever looked at the PHP source code (this was 2 years ago, it might be better now), then you know what I went through when I tried to find the bug myself... Arrrggghhh It's not quite as bad as the Sun Java VM code, but then again I've never seen anything else like the VM code...
PHP is fine for what it was intended for, but I think trying to bring it out of the web server is not going to work too well...:)
I'll stick with Perl/C++/Java for my stuff.
BWP
Have you ever seen the source code to Java 1.4.1? Anyone who can hack that code can just about hack anything. It's a mish-mash of assembler/C/C++ and the way it's written... Arrrgghhh. Not pretty.
Just opening it would not help much until they got it factored enough to get it readable/understandable.
The only reason I even know this is because I compile the FreeBSD patch versions...
BWP
PHP good at the enterprise? Pull the other one.
The one time I tried to write an enterprise (ok, only 3 machines excluding DB server), I ran into everything from a decent lack of modularity (how about decent libraries with no GLOBALS?); Cron job? Use lynx to hit a webpage (yes there is a cli version now...); bad interactions between code segments (trying to use DBM files and PostgreSQL at the same time) and decent JIT tech.
Sure, for small sites I use Perl (either standalone or mod_perl), but was it gets bigger I head to Java.
For a real challenge write me a desktop app in PHP that will run unedited on Unix and MS... I can do it both in Java and Perl (and have done so).
BWP
Huh?
None of those overflows were triggerable unless you already had an account with the RDBM. Exploit? Yes. Remote? No.
BWP
If you haven't patched PostgreSQL within the last 6 months you are vulnerable to multiple buffer overflow/remote root exploits.
remote root???? Just about EVERY postgresql system runs as a normal user, how the hell do you get root out of that?
By default postgresql does NOT even support IP connections, you have to turn it on by either the -i option to postmaster or in the config file.
I think your looking at the Mordred buffer overflows from about 5 months ago. ALL of these require a valid user account to exploit. NONE were remote. Please post the location/posting of a REMOTE for a recent release of PostgreSQL. Versions 6.X, 7.1.X and 7.2.0 do count.
BWP
I would think that the disclaimer of IP would only hold on contributions FROM SCO. What I mean is that the disclaimer would only hold for code that they had contributed to the Kernel/System. If someone else had violated their IP by contributing code, there is NO way that the infringer can grant a license to the vioated IP.
BWP
many (though not M$'s offering) are in the ports tree.
/usr/ports/lang/cli. I played with it, but there is not much there...
For the Microsoft C# on FreeBSD check out
I've went back to Perl and C++ for scripting and compiled work.
Looked at C#, just about worthless unless your on Microsoft (Sorry, I get paid for results, and the free stuff is not quite up to snuff yet).
BWP
Yeah...
Got money for the hotbackups? They cost.
How about working FKs? I mean if I can drop an entire table that FKs pointing it, not much intergerity is there?
On a different note, has anyone done a decent set of benchmarks comparing MySQL with transactions to PostgreSQL? That would be nice to see.
BWP
It is not a done deal.
Sure this law firm has filed the law suit, but until the judge certifies it as a class action, it is worthless.
There are plenty of class action suites filed each year, but only very, very few are certified with this many people (two or three a year).
Who knows, if Bonzi is a private company, they could just shutdown and boom, no more ads, and no money...
BWP
If they open sourced solaris under a normal OSS license (like GPL)
Could never happen. Solaris is still a True Unix (tm) and contains massive amounts of licensed code.
Who does own the Unix rights now adays???
BWP
BSD was sort of forked from SVRx, but had every single piece of code rewritten by the folks at berkley.
Huh? Go and check your Unix history. When Berkeley got their first license for Unix, there was NO SysV. Version 7 ( and 32V for the VAX) Unix is what BSD is based on. Here is a nice little chart of the Unix bloodlines.
BWP
Check the mailing lists, but it was do to standards.
BWP
Time to learn how to use cvsup...:) Hit google up for it.
BWP
You may be thinking of where she challenged the professional duelist to a duel (as revenge) and won. It wasn't so much skill, though she is portrayed as being competition level, but the fact that her bionic eye (and presumably fairly obvious targetting software) let her make shots that would have been impossible for a non-cyborg.
Both this duel and the second one (where she kills Pavel Young), happened way BEFORE she lost her arm and eye. Both of them were lost when she was on Hell, which was two books ago, the duels happened about the 4 book.
That said, some of the reasons she won the duels was the fact that she was a genie (engineered DNA), she was a heavy worlder, and was competion level in both Coup de Vitasse and pistol.
Not to mention the way she forged her fear and rage (love?) into a weapon.
And BTW, just because some has been studying something longer, does NOT make them more skilled. It is obvious during the sword duel that Steadholder Burkett(sp) had been studying sword for awhile, but only saw it as a physical workout instead of a combined mental/physical discpline. That combined with the, at the time, Grayson male superiority, let him loose that one.
BWP
Well if your willing to give up the CD-ROM, then just purchase the book from baen in electronic format. Webscription is where you can do it. I was able to buy about 2 days before it hit the newsstands. Price is about $6 or $7.
They also have other, new releases on sale too...
BWP
Public Domain software is not really Free, because someone can stop its Freedom by putting a nasty license on it.
Ahhh... this is a strawman, the same that is used with the BSDL flamefests.
Even if I grab a piece of PD software, make a couple of changes and slap MY license on to it, the original is STILL PD! They have taken nothing from YOU except the ability to use their changes. Which when you think about it, makes since. They did the work, NOT you.
Just like when "Evil Empire"(R) grabs a piece of BSDL software, hacks the hell out of it and then sells it. The original is still BSDL and you still have access to it. Why should you care if someone wishes to release under a PD or BSDL license? The only reason why I release under the BSDL is that, one, I want credit, and two, I want the little protection of the disclaimer.
BTW, I've released software written by me, under both PD (early stuff) and BSDL (later stuff). I have also contributed patches to GPL'ed projects under the GPL. My choice... NO ONE elses!
BWP
Well, it looks like someone has a little problem.
:)
The helix community server is tossing Internal Server Error about every 5th or 6th time I access it... Opps.
I wonder why?
BWP
Whether the Kde League is a non-profit or a not-for-profit (they are the same thing, in US law), they have to release their financial information - it's not up to them to decide if they want to release the information.
It all depends on the state. On the other hand, if a corp is IRS tax-exmpt, then they HAVE to release it. You can be non-profit without being tax exempt.
I help run a Texas non-profit corp that is not IRS tax-exempt (fraternal org). By our bylaws (but not state or federal law) we are required to release all accounting data to our members.
All a non-profit corp means is that there is no passive income (e.g. dividends) paid to any stockholder. All income has to be used only for corp purposes. Tax exempt on the other hand means that you have to provide some benefit to society, releases you from having to pay taxes on any income, fall under the disclosure laws.
The funny thing is why did they NOT go for the IRS tax exempt status? It is not that hard to get (takes a little while though) and has benefits to boot (ie donations are tax decductiable).
BWP
You can't. I have a pending patent on the underlying method used is "suing everybody"
Huh? I thought Scientology had that one already?
BWP
Sure, Solaris may have more users, but is it a BSD system? OSF/1? Digital Unix? What I mean is if I know only BSD systems, will I be comfortable on them? I never was... I've used Digital Unix, SCO Unix, AT&T SysVr4 amoung others, BSD they are not.
Just becuase something contains BSD code does NOT make them a BSD system... All of the above OSs have a VERY DISTINCT SysV feel to them. Sure I might be able to get BSD semantics out of the userland, but...
BWP