Is it just me or am I wrong in stating that the license is fallacious because they keep referring to the "linux operating system". Last I checked, Linux was a kernel surrounded by GNU tools to make a complete operating system. Would that make the license itself a potential legal target for the FSF? RMS, are you listening?
But at least they have decided not to follow Microsoft's precedent for dumping all support for old products when new ones roll around.
I understand your point perfectly, but....How long do you expect Microsoft to support Win 95, Win98? I'm not trying to troll, but it doesn't seem like an efficient use of resources to continue supporting that old of an OS (barring blatant security holes), when development dollars could be spent on new products/features....Didn't Red Hat announce end-of-life policies for certain releases?
The article mentions a legal defense fund to which Red Hat has contributed $1,000,000. Who can contribute to this fund? I'd be willing to contribute (not a million bucks)if I know the money will go into a warchest against SCO and to protect independent developers.
Mod me offtopic, but Linuxmagazine had an in depth report on POPfile in their May 2003 issue and a little blurb(?) in the July 2003 issue. It's a mail filter that learns, completely written in Perl and works on Windows, Mac Linux and Unix. Seems like a great piece of software.
I can't find the link otherwise I'd post it....sorry
I'm sure that the SEC/judges etc are watching the news, BUT, once this goes to court and I think it will, whatever is said in the media is irrelevant. It'll be..."just the facts". Judging by IBM's silence, do you think it's possible that IBM is just letting SCO dig their own grave by shooting off their mouths? Food for thought..........
I just finished watching the interview and McBride is claiming that the GPL only enforces their claims.....McBride says that the GPL is very clear in stating that there is a difference between donating code and distributing code into Linux kernel. SCO claims that they never 'officially signed away their code' to be used in the linux kernel. He even goes on to say that since there is any proprietary code in the kernel, that the GPL itself is nullified as a valid license for the kernel. Good interview, but McBride still comes off as evasive in some of his responses. (I guess that shouldn't surprise me) This is going to be a major test for the GPL. I'm getting frustrated that we haven't heard more from IBM.
Lucent is currently selling a product that qualifies as a CLASS 5 switch that has a SUN netra box emulating a 3B21D frame as well as CM components. It's called a DRM (Dinstinctive Remote Module)
You'd be surprised at how small of a percentage of calls that are intercepted by CALEA actually are used for call CONTENT. I've been working on this system for over a year. You don't know the hoops a LEA has to go through to get a Title 3 subpoena/warrant. Well over 95% of CALEA usage is for trap and trace. Big Brother is not as big as everyone thinks he is.....
When cell number portability finally gets rolling, I highly doubt that it will be nationwide portability. If anything, It'll be rolled out in stages as has been done with land-line service. Within your LATA maybe? The technology to do it natinally isn't there just yet. The nationwide interconnect agreements that would have to be drawn up between SS7 carriers would take an enormous amount of time
As far as I know, StarOffice has a database program (Adabas) that OOo doesn't.(Check one of the earlier posts) I would hope that for 60 bucks you would get some printed documentation with StarOffice. But then again all I got with Win98 was a 2 page pamphlet for $150
I'm not a programmer, but doesn't FreeBSD have linux binary compatibility? I don't believe Free BSD developers used Linux kernel code. Wouldn't that prove that no linux kernel code must be 'appropriated' to have linux binary compatibility? Can anyone clarify that for me?
I think the reason sales of CD's are down is because people are disgusted with the behavior of the Music industry.
The reason that sales are down has nothing to do with people's disgust of the RIAA. It probably has something to do with the enormous amount of crap they continue to produce and market a la Britney, Avril, Justin etc etc etc
You also have to keep in mind that the database dip is performed by the CALLED party ie: Caller A in New York calls Party B in California. Party B has Caller Id w/name on their phone. Party B's telco provider will perform the dip because the caller ID feature acts as a trigger telling the switch that it needs to check the CNAM database so it has something to display on Party B's caller ID box. That database dip will have to get Caller A's name info from Caller A's SS7 provider's SCP that contains their name info. This is assuming that the call path was SS7 the entire way between NY and California. That is why this service is not guaranteed out of your LATA. The chances that the call will pass over a non-SS7 segment may be small but the chance is still there. You may still have issues where these calling name databases are linked together correctly but the STP/SCP's may not be screening the SS7 messages properly. Moral: There are way too many variables that affect the SS7 messaging that can be set where any telco/SS7 provider can guarantee calling party info 100% of the time. If your carrier is guaranteeing this, they're most likely full of shit
The telco is not blocking the caller ID information. Caller ID is not guaranteed to work out of what is called your 'LATA' (Local Access Transport Area) If you live in NY, your LATA number is 132 which covers all 5 boros of NYC, Westchester County(?), Long Island and a little piece of Greenwich CT. The caller ID information is stored in a database that's part of a separate packet network called SS7. Your telco provider makes a 'dip' or databse query into a CNAM database to get caller ID info based on the number that is calling/called. This SS7 network is used in setting up calls and tearing them down as well as a myriad of other features it can provide. If Caller ID was guaranteed to work across the country between every carrier in the US, the length of time it would take to setup a phone call would be prohibitively long...That's just the basic jist of it. You don't realize how much goes on from the time you pick up your handset, dial some digits and get audible ringing.. Hope that clarifies the situation for you. Please don't mod me down as GEEK
As I see it, the source code for the linux kernel/GNU linux software has been available since day one. Is there anyone out there that could vouch for the SCO claim that there is reimplemented/borrowed/misappropriated code in the kernel/GNU software. If there is, why is this just becoming an issue now? In my eyes, that question does give credibility to the theory that SCO is just "fishing" for a buy-out.
Either way, I hope BIG BLUE and the open source/Free Software Community bitch-slaps SCO in and out of court. I've been using GNU/Linux since 1996 and find it impossible to believe that someone (SCO) could make a blatantly idiotic claim that GNU/Linux could not be where it is today w/o someone giving OSS developers enterprise level code. That is just a HUGE slap in the face to anyone who has been doing work on GNU/Linux software. Whenever I've needed help with any problems I've had with Linux, there's ALWAYS been someone willing to offer first class/knowledgeable help......Yup, even on/.
Cheers to the programmers/developers and testers that have given me such a wonderful operating system!
I've never had a problem setting up samba using CLI but if you're definitely only interested in a GUI setup, try this: http://www.webmin.com It will also let you perform a lot of other admin type stuff besides SAMBA. I had webmin install with no problems on Debian (Woody testing) and Slackware 7.1
I know I'll be modded down for "OffTopic" but, It doesn't matter how many times I see that sig, I just start cracking up.
BTW- My brother-in-law (a very anal audiophile) has been ranting about the current CD sampling rate (44.1KHz)for years and does his own music production with equipment sampling at least 48KHz. I also had the opportunity to challenge him on the difference in sound quality.....I'm not an audiophile like him, but there was a difference
Slashdot Mirror
Is it just me or am I wrong in stating that the license is fallacious because they keep referring to the "linux operating system". Last I checked, Linux was a kernel surrounded by GNU tools to make a complete operating system. Would that make the license itself a potential legal target for the FSF? RMS, are you listening?
The article mentions a legal defense fund to which Red Hat has contributed $1,000,000. Who can contribute to this fund? I'd be willing to contribute (not a million bucks)if I know the money will go into a warchest against SCO and to protect independent developers.
Mod me offtopic, but Linuxmagazine had an in depth report on POPfile in their May 2003 issue and a little blurb(?) in the July 2003 issue. It's a mail filter that learns, completely written in Perl and works on Windows, Mac Linux and Unix. Seems like a great piece of software. I can't find the link otherwise I'd post it....sorry
I'm sure that the SEC/judges etc are watching the news, BUT, once this goes to court and I think it will, whatever is said in the media is irrelevant. It'll be..."just the facts". Judging by IBM's silence, do you think it's possible that IBM is just letting SCO dig their own grave by shooting off their mouths? Food for thought..........
I just finished watching the interview and McBride is claiming that the GPL only enforces their claims.....McBride says that the GPL is very clear in stating that there is a difference between donating code and distributing code into Linux kernel. SCO claims that they never 'officially signed away their code' to be used in the linux kernel. He even goes on to say that since there is any proprietary code in the kernel, that the GPL itself is nullified as a valid license for the kernel. Good interview, but McBride still comes off as evasive in some of his responses. (I guess that shouldn't surprise me) This is going to be a major test for the GPL. I'm getting frustrated that we haven't heard more from IBM.
My ......head....is beginning...to hurt......Must ....not....read ..Babel..fish..
(Slumps over keyboard and expires)
You'd be surprised at how small of a percentage of calls that are intercepted by CALEA actually are used for call CONTENT. I've been working on this system for over a year. You don't know the hoops a LEA has to go through to get a Title 3 subpoena/warrant. Well over 95% of CALEA usage is for trap and trace. Big Brother is not as big as everyone thinks he is.....
I'll be the first sacrificial lamb. Just pay for my t-shirt. You can keep the gift certificate. I don't think it's a bad idea at all. Good Luck
When cell number portability finally gets rolling, I highly doubt that it will be nationwide portability. If anything, It'll be rolled out in stages as has been done with land-line service. Within your LATA maybe? The technology to do it natinally isn't there just yet. The nationwide interconnect agreements that would have to be drawn up between SS7 carriers would take an enormous amount of time
As far as I know, StarOffice has a database program (Adabas) that OOo doesn't.(Check one of the earlier posts) I would hope that for 60 bucks you would get some printed documentation with StarOffice. But then again all I got with Win98 was a 2 page pamphlet for $150
One of these days I'll break down and give FreeBSD a run (I'm still plowing through Slackware 9.0)
I'm not a programmer, but doesn't FreeBSD have linux binary compatibility? I don't believe Free BSD developers used Linux kernel code. Wouldn't that prove that no linux kernel code must be 'appropriated' to have linux binary compatibility? Can anyone clarify that for me?
You're exactly right. This is not news. This is a nightmare. Those iMacs aren't looking so bad anymore
You also have to keep in mind that the database dip is performed by the CALLED party ie: Caller A in New York calls Party B in California. Party B has Caller Id w/name on their phone. Party B's telco provider will perform the dip because the caller ID feature acts as a trigger telling the switch that it needs to check the CNAM database so it has something to display on Party B's caller ID box. That database dip will have to get Caller A's name info from Caller A's SS7 provider's SCP that contains their name info. This is assuming that the call path was SS7 the entire way between NY and California. That is why this service is not guaranteed out of your LATA. The chances that the call will pass over a non-SS7 segment may be small but the chance is still there. You may still have issues where these calling name databases are linked together correctly but the STP/SCP's may not be screening the SS7 messages properly. Moral: There are way too many variables that affect the SS7 messaging that can be set where any telco/SS7 provider can guarantee calling party info 100% of the time. If your carrier is guaranteeing this, they're most likely full of shit
The telco is not blocking the caller ID information. Caller ID is not guaranteed to work out of what is called your 'LATA' (Local Access Transport Area) If you live in NY, your LATA number is 132 which covers all 5 boros of NYC, Westchester County(?), Long Island and a little piece of Greenwich CT. The caller ID information is stored in a database that's part of a separate packet network called SS7. Your telco provider makes a 'dip' or databse query into a CNAM database to get caller ID info based on the number that is calling/called. This SS7 network is used in setting up calls and tearing them down as well as a myriad of other features it can provide. If Caller ID was guaranteed to work across the country between every carrier in the US, the length of time it would take to setup a phone call would be prohibitively long...That's just the basic jist of it. You don't realize how much goes on from the time you pick up your handset, dial some digits and get audible ringing.. Hope that clarifies the situation for you. Please don't mod me down as GEEK
As I see it, the source code for the linux kernel/GNU linux software has been available since day one. Is there anyone out there that could vouch for the SCO claim that there is reimplemented/borrowed/misappropriated code in the kernel/GNU software. If there is, why is this just becoming an issue now? In my eyes, that question does give credibility to the theory that SCO is just "fishing" for a buy-out. Either way, I hope BIG BLUE and the open source/Free Software Community bitch-slaps SCO in and out of court. I've been using GNU/Linux since 1996 and find it impossible to believe that someone (SCO) could make a blatantly idiotic claim that GNU/Linux could not be where it is today w/o someone giving OSS developers enterprise level code. That is just a HUGE slap in the face to anyone who has been doing work on GNU/Linux software. Whenever I've needed help with any problems I've had with Linux, there's ALWAYS been someone willing to offer first class/knowledgeable help......Yup, even on /.
Cheers to the programmers/developers and testers that have given me such a wonderful operating system!
MOD PARENT UP +1 Please!!!!! Some of us out here still have a conscience when it comes to downloading music without ripping off the musicians!
Congratulations on successfully installing mod_ssl on Apache?!?!?! I'll check your website again later (linux-screws.com)
I've never had a problem setting up samba using CLI but if you're definitely only interested in a GUI setup, try this:
http://www.webmin.com
It will also let you perform a lot of other admin type stuff besides SAMBA.
I had webmin install with no problems on Debian (Woody testing) and Slackware 7.1
I know I'll be modded down for "OffTopic" but, It doesn't matter how many times I see that sig, I just start cracking up. BTW- My brother-in-law (a very anal audiophile) has been ranting about the current CD sampling rate (44.1KHz)for years and does his own music production with equipment sampling at least 48KHz. I also had the opportunity to challenge him on the difference in sound quality.....I'm not an audiophile like him, but there was a difference