You don't see license infringement an issue? As in, "it's perfectly ok to disregard licensing"? Or as in "you haven't proved it happened"?
The latter. I am under the impression that NuSphere has closed-source software which communicates via IPC to GPL software. If this is the case, I don't see where the violation is happening. NuSphere has also stated they will provide or they are providing the source for all of the GPL'd code.
It [MySQL's suit] says NuSphere's violation of the GPL automatically terminates its rights under the GPL.
NuSphere people call the charge a 'sideshow' and a 'smokescreen concealing MySQL's termination tactics.'
I have to agree with NuSphere on this point. The contract and possibly the trademark are the two issues of interest. I feel as if MySQL's developers are trying to pull more people into the fray to help them win publically.
As for who is at fault, I have no clue. If NuSphere can prove that payment was received in full by MySQL, I can see a few developers in hot water for breach of contract.
What is a little creepy is the fact that I bought their books this year before they died. I had never read books by either man, so I decided to buy The Boat of a Million Years and Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
I also have finally read the entire Heechee series of books (all five) which I purchased this spring. I hope I am not a curse. Nah.
I must say that Half Price Books is a great place to shop. Half (no pun) the books I buy there are in new condition. I try to scout there about every two weeks to see if I can find a classic in top quality to read and add to my collection. I hate creases in the spines of my books!!!:)
No, you said the rest of the world has a lack of wisdom.
My comment was in response to this comment: (as if the rest of the world didn't hate the US enough already). I just used his comment of "rest of the world". Whatever he is referring as the "rest of the world", I was responding. Since I do not know the exact context of his reference, I used it to represent the "rest of the world" that hates the U.S.
Thank you for showing everyone why the rest of the world hates the US.
I did not state that the U.S. was good for ignoring other countries opinions. I just explained why many people don't care any more.
Like the US likes to continuously blame China?
For what? The aircraft incident? I have not seen anyone in the U.S. burn the flags of other countries.
Maybe you should try looking at your arguments from another persons perspective, and you'd realise how insulting they are to non-americans, not that you'd care.
I always do. I have relatives in Japan and Taiwan.
Remember again that my comment was an analysis of the hate attacks by many countries against the U.S. and how people here are reacting to decades of it. That fact does not represent how I act or feel towards others.
Your comment on the other hand does show a lack of wisdom that I hope will grow with age.
One wonders what happens to the fissible materials in the bomb. Plutonium is some pretty nasty stuff and I don't know how much better off we'd be with hundreds to thousands of kilograms of plutonium dust released in the upper atmosphere.
That is a good question. There might be risk involved, but it would be better than fallout. A scientist would be a better source of information.
I'd go with cruise missles which the NMD does not address.
The navy has some pretty cool weapons for intercepting cruise missles. I saw it on Discovery or TLC. It was a ship-mounted laser which could take out missles pretty easily.
I think what he was saying is that if 100 missiles were launched at ONE CITY (e.g. DC), and only 1 got through, that's all it would take to destroy the city. 100% effectiveness.
Fallout from one missle would be much better than fallout from 100 missles for the people in areas not hit. Besides it might accidentally take out all of the missles.
The thing we should be worried about is bombs being smuggled into the US and/or built here.
I bet anything the U.S. government worries about this as well.
If any of these rogue countries like Iraq or Afghanistan or North Korea ever did get the balls to launch a nuclear missile at us, they have to know that their life is over.
What if they don't care? The missles will be here in 20 minutes. That is barely any time to research it.
The last SDI helped in many other areas of technology as I recall. I believe some it made it into medical advancements. It was mentioned in some Discovery or TLC program. I bet some of it went into NASA projects as well as aerospace technologies.
Any scientist or engineer worth his/her salt laughed at the Strategic Defense Initiative when Reagan suggested it, and they continue to laugh now.
I guess the doctors are laughing at them now as they help people with the failure.
When we have the technology, and the need, to develop this, I will favor it. For now, though, it's a complete waste.
With the missle technology Clinton sold to China who knows who holds the ability to build and launch a few ICBM's. The question becomes when would be the right time to develop this. It certainly must be before a threat arises.
And Iraq didn't invade Kuwait. They knew full well that most (if not all) countries in their area as well as countries dependent on oil (i.e., U.S.) would be very unhappy about it. Heck, some might even retaliate.;)
(as if the rest of the world didn't hate the US enough already)
This is the rest of the world's lack of wisdom. If you continuously blame someone (or some country), they will end of not caring about your opinion. If no matter what I do, I get yelled at, I will just do whatever I want to do.
Except for W's friends in the military.
He did not make very many just after the election. Remember that he was talking about increases in pay but not about the bases and such. The top brass did not seem happy during his speech.
I have been trying to help out on #FreeBSDhelp for the last few days. This is frustrating, but at least now I know why I have not been able to connect.
Whoever is doing this should lose the use of a computer for a year. That would be an appropriate punishment.
They've picked up on the scism between the *BSDs and Linux over the GPL, and they're playing one off against the other. "It's not Open Source we don't like, it's the GPL!" - presto! They get instant allies from the *BSD folks.
Since they have been aware of the GPL, they have probably felt this way. Their dislike of the GPL is nothing new. The probably just feel safer with FreeBSD than Linux.
Even though many people in the BSD community dislike the GPL, this does not make them necessarily trust Microsoft. I don't see instant allies anywhere.
How long before we are faced with a version of "Microsoft BSD"?
I strongly doubt this will ever happen. Why? Cost. Why would Microsoft want to go through all of the trouble of porting everything (i.e., MFC's, WinSock2(pain!), GUI) to *BSD? It would be easier to copy (not steal) code from any BSD that they wanted than to move all of their software and everyone else's software to "Microsoft BSD".
you'll need *this* little kernel patch, and IIS For BSD will need *this* little tweak to the network stack, and oh, init now requires an instance of Actice Directory somewhere before it'll boot and...
Actually, this sounds a lot like the kernel module for Linux scenario from nVidia.;)
It seems Solaris is washing its hands of this code completely - not even going to support it. For all intents and purposes, its as close to true abandonware as you can get.
Shame on you for smoking such wonderful stuff and not sharing.:)
Seriously, they are not abandoning Solaris which is where the label abandonware comes into play. They are just not offering the source to Solaris any longer. They still support Solaris.
I'm sure you heard about FreeBSD's merge with BSDI. FreeBSD has very close ties with BSDI now and outwardly thats a postive thing, but it really isn't. I'm not one to preach doom by association, but I'm afraid FreeBSD has doomed itself by the move. BSDI is best known for its archaic OS and high cost of ownership.
This is irrelevant since FreeBSD is picking from BSD/OS not the other way around. IOW, FreeBSD is not dependent on BSD/OS. They have no dependence on BSDi which is no more; Wind River has a portion of it now.
FreeBSD's C2 security certification is horrible also. Even NT can do better than it!
C2 certification is a joke. The U.S. Government does not even seem to follow it since they use NT 4 in many places without it conforming to C2.
Actual memory bandwidth performance is a fraction of all of Sun's offerings...
Memory bandwidth is a hardware item. Sun's architecture is much faster than x86. OS's have little control over the design of the memory bus.
the multiprocessor support is a joke since it has a poorly implemented semaphore locking mechanism.
This has been acknowledged and is why SMPng is being worked on.
But even then the open source nature of FreeBSD will cripple it - all open source code does is allow poor quality code be used in mission critical systems.
You are now comparing FreeBSD development style against Linux. You obviously have never done your "fair share of testing on the VM scheme" as you stated. If you had, you would know how FreeBSD is developed. Thankfully, it is nothing like Linux, but you should already know that.
Recent tests done by SysAdmin magazine have *BSD coming in last place in terms of performance when paired against Linux and Solaris.
Without even basic tuning for FreeBSD? They did not even have SoftUpdates active. Sorry. The test was flawed.
I think its time to let FreeBSD be merged out of use and let operating systems such as Solaris, NT, or even Linux take its place.
With the incredible growth FreeBSD has been experiencing, your opinion is a joke.
Slashdot Mirror
IPv6 does not have any more support for QoS than IPv4
Maybe it has something to do with the Kame project having QoS built-in. Someday I will have time to experiment with AltQ
Unfortunately, that day seems far away.
You don't see license infringement an issue? As in, "it's perfectly ok to disregard licensing"? Or as in "you haven't proved it happened"?
The latter. I am under the impression that NuSphere has closed-source software which communicates via IPC to GPL software. If this is the case, I don't see where the violation is happening. NuSphere has also stated they will provide or they are providing the source for all of the GPL'd code.
* breach of the interim agreement we had
* trademark infringement
These are the two issues I mention.
* breach of the GPL licence
I don't see this as an issue. Enlighten me.
It all depends on how they claim it is unenforceable and if other licenses have the same qualities determined to be unenforceable.
It [MySQL's suit] says NuSphere's violation of the GPL automatically terminates its rights under the GPL.
NuSphere people call the charge a 'sideshow' and a 'smokescreen concealing MySQL's termination tactics.'
I have to agree with NuSphere on this point. The contract and possibly the trademark are the two issues of interest. I feel as if MySQL's developers are trying to pull more people into the fray to help them win publically.
As for who is at fault, I have no clue. If NuSphere can prove that payment was received in full by MySQL, I can see a few developers in hot water for breach of contract.
What is a little creepy is the fact that I bought their books this year before they died. I had never read books by either man, so I decided to buy The Boat of a Million Years and Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
:)
I also have finally read the entire Heechee series of books (all five) which I purchased this spring. I hope I am not a curse. Nah.
I must say that Half Price Books is a great place to shop. Half (no pun) the books I buy there are in new condition. I try to scout there about every two weeks to see if I can find a classic in top quality to read and add to my collection. I hate creases in the spines of my books!!!
No, you said the rest of the world has a lack of wisdom.
My comment was in response to this comment: (as if the rest of the world didn't hate the US enough already). I just used his comment of "rest of the world". Whatever he is referring as the "rest of the world", I was responding. Since I do not know the exact context of his reference, I used it to represent the "rest of the world" that hates the U.S.
Thank you for showing everyone why the rest of the world hates the US.
I did not state that the U.S. was good for ignoring other countries opinions. I just explained why many people don't care any more.
Like the US likes to continuously blame China?
For what? The aircraft incident? I have not seen anyone in the U.S. burn the flags of other countries.
Maybe you should try looking at your arguments from another persons perspective, and you'd realise how insulting they are to non-americans, not that you'd care.
I always do. I have relatives in Japan and Taiwan.
Remember again that my comment was an analysis of the hate attacks by many countries against the U.S. and how people here are reacting to decades of it. That fact does not represent how I act or feel towards others.
Your comment on the other hand does show a lack of wisdom that I hope will grow with age.
I am a troll because I partially agreed with him. Sheesh!
One wonders what happens to the fissible materials in the bomb. Plutonium is some pretty nasty stuff and I don't know how much better off we'd be with hundreds to thousands of kilograms of plutonium dust released in the upper atmosphere.
That is a good question. There might be risk involved, but it would be better than fallout. A scientist would be a better source of information.
I'd go with cruise missles which the NMD does not address.
The navy has some pretty cool weapons for intercepting cruise missles. I saw it on Discovery or TLC. It was a ship-mounted laser which could take out missles pretty easily.
I think what he was saying is that if 100 missiles were launched at ONE CITY (e.g. DC), and only 1 got through, that's all it would take to destroy the city. 100% effectiveness.
Fallout from one missle would be much better than fallout from 100 missles for the people in areas not hit. Besides it might accidentally take out all of the missles.
The thing we should be worried about is bombs being smuggled into the US and/or built here.
I bet anything the U.S. government worries about this as well.
If any of these rogue countries like Iraq or Afghanistan or North Korea ever did get the balls to launch a nuclear missile at us, they have to know that their life is over.
What if they don't care? The missles will be here in 20 minutes. That is barely any time to research it.
So am I short-sighted?
:)
How many fingers am I holding up?
The last SDI helped in many other areas of technology as I recall. I believe some it made it into medical advancements. It was mentioned in some Discovery or TLC program. I bet some of it went into NASA projects as well as aerospace technologies.
Any scientist or engineer worth his/her salt laughed at the Strategic Defense Initiative when Reagan suggested it, and they continue to laugh now.
I guess the doctors are laughing at them now as they help people with the failure.
When we have the technology, and the need, to develop this, I will favor it. For now, though, it's a complete waste.
With the missle technology Clinton sold to China who knows who holds the ability to build and launch a few ICBM's. The question becomes when would be the right time to develop this. It certainly must be before a threat arises.
The rogue nation theory is FUD and W knows it.
;)
And Iraq didn't invade Kuwait. They knew full well that most (if not all) countries in their area as well as countries dependent on oil (i.e., U.S.) would be very unhappy about it. Heck, some might even retaliate.
(as if the rest of the world didn't hate the US enough already)
This is the rest of the world's lack of wisdom. If you continuously blame someone (or some country), they will end of not caring about your opinion. If no matter what I do, I get yelled at, I will just do whatever I want to do.
Except for W's friends in the military.
He did not make very many just after the election. Remember that he was talking about increases in pay but not about the bases and such. The top brass did not seem happy during his speech.
where I live, there are cameras in a bus interchange, and there are signs up saying that cameras may be monitoring you.
Those are probably posted to discourage crime (i.e., mugging) at those location(s).
I have been trying to help out on #FreeBSDhelp for the last few days. This is frustrating, but at least now I know why I have not been able to connect.
Whoever is doing this should lose the use of a computer for a year. That would be an appropriate punishment.
You should of done it in Ebay lingo©!
All I know is English with a few words in Spanish and Chinese. Ebay lingo is beyond comprehension.
You sir get an A+. :)
Also, they just switched to the MIT license. Cool.
FreeBSD will have it: fa.freebsd.hackers post.
It will only be used as a stepping stone until a freer version is complete:
- The main point of this port is to have a reasonable native freebsd
pthread implementation till the scheduler activations stuff is ready.
They've picked up on the scism between the *BSDs and Linux over the GPL, and they're playing one off against the other. "It's not Open Source we don't like, it's the GPL!" - presto! They get instant allies from the *BSD folks.
;)
Since they have been aware of the GPL, they have probably felt this way. Their dislike of the GPL is nothing new. The probably just feel safer with FreeBSD than Linux.
Even though many people in the BSD community dislike the GPL, this does not make them necessarily trust Microsoft. I don't see instant allies anywhere.
How long before we are faced with a version of "Microsoft BSD"?
I strongly doubt this will ever happen. Why? Cost. Why would Microsoft want to go through all of the trouble of porting everything (i.e., MFC's, WinSock2(pain!), GUI) to *BSD? It would be easier to copy (not steal) code from any BSD that they wanted than to move all of their software and everyone else's software to "Microsoft BSD".
you'll need *this* little kernel patch, and IIS For BSD will need *this* little tweak to the network stack, and oh, init now requires an instance of Actice Directory somewhere before it'll boot and...
Actually, this sounds a lot like the kernel module for Linux scenario from nVidia.
It seems Solaris is washing its hands of this code completely - not even going to support it. For all intents and purposes, its as close to true abandonware as you can get.
:)
Shame on you for smoking such wonderful stuff and not sharing.
Seriously, they are not abandoning Solaris which is where the label abandonware comes into play. They are just not offering the source to Solaris any longer. They still support Solaris.
... why won't my programme exit when I push Alt-F4?
:)
I run into this problem often under Win98.
I'm sure you heard about FreeBSD's merge with BSDI. FreeBSD has very close ties with BSDI now and outwardly thats a postive thing, but it really isn't. I'm not one to preach doom by association, but I'm afraid FreeBSD has doomed itself by the move. BSDI is best known for its archaic OS and high cost of ownership.
This is irrelevant since FreeBSD is picking from BSD/OS not the other way around. IOW, FreeBSD is not dependent on BSD/OS. They have no dependence on BSDi which is no more; Wind River has a portion of it now.
FreeBSD's C2 security certification is horrible also. Even NT can do better than it!
C2 certification is a joke. The U.S. Government does not even seem to follow it since they use NT 4 in many places without it conforming to C2.
Actual memory bandwidth performance is a fraction of all of Sun's offerings...
Memory bandwidth is a hardware item. Sun's architecture is much faster than x86. OS's have little control over the design of the memory bus.
the multiprocessor support is a joke since it has a poorly implemented semaphore locking mechanism.
This has been acknowledged and is why SMPng is being worked on.
But even then the open source nature of FreeBSD will cripple it - all open source code does is allow poor quality code be used in mission critical systems.
You are now comparing FreeBSD development style against Linux. You obviously have never done your "fair share of testing on the VM scheme" as you stated. If you had, you would know how FreeBSD is developed. Thankfully, it is nothing like Linux, but you should already know that.
Recent tests done by SysAdmin magazine have *BSD coming in last place in terms of performance when paired against Linux and Solaris.
Without even basic tuning for FreeBSD? They did not even have SoftUpdates active. Sorry. The test was flawed.
I think its time to let FreeBSD be merged out of use and let operating systems such as Solaris, NT, or even Linux take its place.
With the incredible growth FreeBSD has been experiencing, your opinion is a joke.
He is just a troll who has been annoying everyone with his/her attacks of BSD.
BTW, when you say 8000 copies of BSD sold, does that just mean BSDi's version or all of them (Free,Net,Open,BSDi)?