McAfee may have thought about this for some time, but check out the Macromedia - announcing getting in Linux business day after the news about advancing works over GPLFlash v2. Coincidence? Yeah right.
And then imagine a Beowulf cluster of these Cells!
Re:Declare your bias, why don't you?
on
OpenBSD 3.7 Reviewed
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
He talks about the licensing issues. Which drives me to the question: what's the logic behind throwing away Apache 2 (because of too restrictive license) and distributing closed-source wireless drivers at the same time?
Congratulations, dudes. Posting almost-direct link to the trailer on main/. will surely... oh damn, wait! The site's still up! Are they a part of OSTG too?
By "forcing" I mean bashing for not following The Path of GNU. And it IS bad, why - well,/. comments are not the place for discussing "why GPL is (not) good for everything".
And yes, these are connected and part of a single argument - which follow the statement don't bash proprietary software and commercial licenses, if you want it the clear way.
No, what I'm saying is that forcing everyone (especially companies) to release all their product under GPL and only GPL is just plain bad and there should be commercial licenses available to buy for developing proprietary soft.
Well, if you think it's bad (requiring license for developing "proprietary commercial software", as written on Trolltech site), I think you read too many RMS interviews recently.
(yes, you can mod this one troll and flamebait, I don't care, OSS zealots!)
Slashdot Mirror
You are definitely European, not American, aren't you?
McAfee may have thought about this for some time, but check out the Macromedia - announcing getting in Linux business day after the news about advancing works over GPLFlash v2. Coincidence? Yeah right.
So, I wonder whether you'll be moderated down as Flamebait or Offtopic? Because if I had mod points, I couldn't decide for quite a while. Maybe both.
because they are nightly builds, that is - versions with applied patch, but untested yet.
And then imagine a Beowulf cluster of these Cells!
He talks about the licensing issues. Which drives me to the question: what's the logic behind throwing away Apache 2 (because of too restrictive license) and distributing closed-source wireless drivers at the same time?
Very simple: you check only links of great popularity OR collected by your friends.
Yes, but do they run Linux?
Almost all of the comments criticizing Perl have been modded "Troll". Slashdot authors getting touchy?
If they'd really used this naming scheme, most Windows version should be named WinWTF.
Yes, but does it run Linux?
Oh, wait...
I wrote Emacs, you insensitive clod!
Link to open-source game site posted on /. without any mirrors. Guess what's happened to the server?
Direct link to ISO file on Slashdot main site. Let the slashdotting begin!
Mod parent +1: cruel, funny and brilliantly sarcastic.
Congratulations, dudes. Posting almost-direct link to the trailer on main /. will surely... oh damn, wait! The site's still up! Are they a part of OSTG too?
Download & Changelog:
* 0.1.0 - March 5, 2005: Initial release. Download Now!
MD5: f554fc11ee41a30bc5baf15a0fd07256
Confusing 1.0 with 0.1.0 - way to go, editors! Would like to write more, but gone compiling new 6.11 Linux kernel.
You can always use Google. Ever heard of that tool? If not, check out Ruby on Rails Site.
Don't worry, if you want browser supporting it AND turned on by default, I'm sure you should read previous news ;).
BSD was dying in '98, it's gotta be dead by now, right? =)
Netcraft hasn't confirmed it yet, so watch out with these assumptions.
You obviously haven't read the summary:
The article states that Microsoft is thinking about charging for their anti-virus and anti-spyware software.
So what makes this June Release by one Microsoft executive more believable than other announcements?
They don't announce including Duke Nukem Forever with this LHorn release.
By "forcing" I mean bashing for not following The Path of GNU. And it IS bad, why - well, /. comments are not the place for discussing "why GPL is (not) good for everything".
And yes, these are connected and part of a single argument - which follow the statement don't bash proprietary software and commercial licenses, if you want it the clear way.
No, what I'm saying is that forcing everyone (especially companies) to release all their product under GPL and only GPL is just plain bad and there should be commercial licenses available to buy for developing proprietary soft.
Well, if you think it's bad (requiring license for developing "proprietary commercial software", as written on Trolltech site), I think you read too many RMS interviews recently.
(yes, you can mod this one troll and flamebait, I don't care, OSS zealots!)