This was a 16-bit home computer running games off of disk. Because it was 16-bit the graphics were far better than the Amstrad, Spectrum and Commodore games. In fact most games were made first for the Amiga and then downsized to fit the other formats. You could play games on keyboard or two button joystick. This was a very popular computer in it's time. Made mid-late eighties and lasted until the mid nineties.
(The Amiga was actually a 32-bit computer with 12-bit graphics.)
Re:They had this ruled when I was in grade school
on
KDE Moves to BitKeeper
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
April fools gags were only allowed until noon.
That was just a cop-out excuse made by people with no sense of humour.
IIRC, ISO 8601 allows a whole bunch of optional syntax that can confuse things. Also, the text of ISO 8601 isn't freely available. Why not campaign for RFC 3339full-date format dates instead?
GPL v2 only speaks about:"object code or executable" . Do you have the executable if you use a washing machine running linux?
Do you think it is legal to take MS Windows, install it on the same washing machine, and sell a few million of these washing machines to the public without paying for Windows licenses?
If the GPLv2 only speaks about "object code or executables", and for some reason, the courts don't consider the programs on the washing machine to be object code or executables, then a distributor has no legal basis for distributing that washing machine at all.
As has been mentioned before, the GPL grants specific rights to people, provided that they meet certain conditions. Any distribution rights not granted by the GPL are implicitly reserved, and it would be a violation of most countries' copyright laws to exercise these ungranted rights.
I think you could drop stuff like section 2c, or rewrite the GPL to be the same as the LGPL, and still be copyleft, but I can't think of any reason why that would be done.
(I won't bother here, because it's all in french so it would be useless for y'all yankees)
I'm not a Yankee, and I understand French, you insensitive clod!
I wonder how long it will be until this guy's university gets a patent on his work. I mean, *obviously* he wouldn't have published his work unless he could get it patented.
I'm in the hardware business and I'm wondering if there are any central guidelines to better guarantee compatibility with Linux/*BSD.
"Release complete documentation of said hardware" is that central guideline. Whether or not some minority of manufacturers aren't happy with that changes nothing.
Intel claimed that the disabled FPU in the 486SX was only a temporary thing. Eventually, there would be a unique die for the 486SX and it wouldn't have an FPU at all. I kind of doubt this ever happened. The 486SX wasn't very popular.
If they could save die area, you can bet that they would have removed the FPU. The cost of any silicon chip is roughly proportional to the cube of the die area. (You can easily figure this out. Just consider that the cost per wafer and the number of defects per wafer are almost constant, and that you can increase the number of dies per wafer if you reduce the die area.)
The autoconf scripts are a mess. They run slow. They take up 200 to 300 kB compressed. They test for various basic POSIX features that exist already on every OS you'd ever care to support. They add several extra layers of complexity.
autoconf checks for whatever you tell it to check for. If you don't want to check for sys/socket.h, don't tell it to.
Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs;
and that you know you can do these things.
And, section 4:
4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License.
Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.
If the company has already distributed MyApp, but has not included the proper notices required by the GPL, then under section 4 of the GPL, the company has forfeited any rights to distribute GPLFile.c ever. In this case, any future attempt to distribute GPLFile.c (in binary or source form), or anything that includes it, violates copyright law, because the rights that might have been granted under the GPL no longer apply to them.
Once you forfeit your rights under the GPL, you cannot regain them (unilaterally), and you are not even allowed to distribute the original source code.
In practice, we typically see companies "fixing" their GPL violations, by ignoring section 4, meeting all the other requirements, and pretending that no violation ever happened. So far, copyright holders have tolerated this, because it serves their purposes, but there's no reason why they must. I can imagine a scenario where "the company" we're talking about is actually a fierce competitor of IBM, and where IBM gets a permanent injunction against this company to prevent them from distributing MyApp, whether under the GPL or not.
Some people should really take the GPL much more seriously. It is not a toy, and you can't expect to wait until you get caught violating it before you come into compliance.
In they're head, they are thinking, "Hey! This is great! People who are doing non-commercial stuff can use. Like, if someone's making a Free Software video game, they can reuse it. So this helps all those net projects.
Software that has non-commercial-only restrictions is not free software byanyone'sdefinition.
I burn it to CD-Rs that I know won't get moved around or scratched. They stand a good chance of lasting the rest of my life.
No! Check those backups! I have lost data stored on CD-Rs (luckily I had copies), and many of my discs have started to turn yellow after about 2 years! Also, you can sometimes see these little spots of discolouration on the CDs, which makes me think there's a fungus of some sort that's eating them.
The lifespan of CD-Rs is unknown at this point. Don't trust them for more than a year without inspection, and make fresh copies after 5 or so years.
I'd also recommend using some kind of forward error-correction scheme, like par2.
You realize that mbox format corrupts your messages, right? Lines that start with "From" are often switched to ">From", or other contortions.
Use maildir format. Of course, I'm not sure what kind of support exists in Windows clients for maildirs, but I would hope that by now they've started using it.
Slashdot Mirror
The first word in your post is a non-action verb.
Hmm... Ok, looking at the schematics for my A500, I see a 24-bit address bus and a 16-bit data bus.
This was a 16-bit home computer running games off of disk. Because it was 16-bit the graphics were far better than the Amstrad, Spectrum and Commodore games. In fact most games were made first for the Amiga and then downsized to fit the other formats. You could play games on keyboard or two button joystick. This was a very popular computer in it's time. Made mid-late eighties and lasted until the mid nineties.
(The Amiga was actually a 32-bit computer with 12-bit graphics.)
That was just a cop-out excuse made by people with no sense of humour.
... for talking about the SDM outside the SDM.
"No technical reason"... I doubt it. Please post an analysis of the impact on the root servers.
IIRC, ISO 8601 allows a whole bunch of optional syntax that can confuse things. Also, the text of ISO 8601 isn't freely available. Why not campaign for RFC 3339 full-date format dates instead?
Do you think it is legal to take MS Windows, install it on the same washing machine, and sell a few million of these washing machines to the public without paying for Windows licenses?
If the GPLv2 only speaks about "object code or executables", and for some reason, the courts don't consider the programs on the washing machine to be object code or executables, then a distributor has no legal basis for distributing that washing machine at all.
As has been mentioned before, the GPL grants specific rights to people, provided that they meet certain conditions. Any distribution rights not granted by the GPL are implicitly reserved, and it would be a violation of most countries' copyright laws to exercise these ungranted rights.
I think you could drop stuff like section 2c, or rewrite the GPL to be the same as the LGPL, and still be copyleft, but I can't think of any reason why that would be done.
I think you're looking for
Oh, quit trolling... I get this on my Debian box:
Not to mention that apt hasn't been a Debian-only tool for quite a while...
(I won't bother here, because it's all in french so it would be useless for y'all yankees) I'm not a Yankee, and I understand French, you insensitive clod!
</sarcasm>
"Release complete documentation of said hardware" is that central guideline. Whether or not some minority of manufacturers aren't happy with that changes nothing.
They'll probably get sued out of existence for patent infringement if they do that.
If they could save die area, you can bet that they would have removed the FPU. The cost of any silicon chip is roughly proportional to the cube of the die area. (You can easily figure this out. Just consider that the cost per wafer and the number of defects per wafer are almost constant, and that you can increase the number of dies per wafer if you reduce the die area.)
autoconf checks for whatever you tell it to check for. If you don't want to check for sys/socket.h, don't tell it to.
Do you work for the telecom industry?
From the preamble (with emphasis added):
And, section 4:
If the company has already distributed MyApp, but has not included the proper notices required by the GPL, then under section 4 of the GPL, the company has forfeited any rights to distribute GPLFile.c ever. In this case, any future attempt to distribute GPLFile.c (in binary or source form), or anything that includes it, violates copyright law, because the rights that might have been granted under the GPL no longer apply to them.
Once you forfeit your rights under the GPL, you cannot regain them (unilaterally), and you are not even allowed to distribute the original source code.
In practice, we typically see companies "fixing" their GPL violations, by ignoring section 4, meeting all the other requirements, and pretending that no violation ever happened. So far, copyright holders have tolerated this, because it serves their purposes, but there's no reason why they must. I can imagine a scenario where "the company" we're talking about is actually a fierce competitor of IBM, and where IBM gets a permanent injunction against this company to prevent them from distributing MyApp, whether under the GPL or not.
Some people should really take the GPL much more seriously. It is not a toy, and you can't expect to wait until you get caught violating it before you come into compliance.
Software that has non-commercial-only restrictions is not free software by anyone's definition.
#!/usr/bin/python
import poplib
# (do stuff here)
No! Check those backups! I have lost data stored on CD-Rs (luckily I had copies), and many of my discs have started to turn yellow after about 2 years! Also, you can sometimes see these little spots of discolouration on the CDs, which makes me think there's a fungus of some sort that's eating them.
The lifespan of CD-Rs is unknown at this point. Don't trust them for more than a year without inspection, and make fresh copies after 5 or so years.
I'd also recommend using some kind of forward error-correction scheme, like par2.
Use maildir format. Of course, I'm not sure what kind of support exists in Windows clients for maildirs, but I would hope that by now they've started using it.
"Identity theft" is actually fraud (not theft), just like "killer whales" are actually dolphins (not whales).
That's copyright infringement (violating copyright law) and plagiarism (claiming others' work as your own).