One of the wonders of the world, and a large multicultural modern metropolitan city. Just don't bother with the US side of the falls.. or Buffalo for that matter.
If you agree that MNG support is useful, please vote for the bug, with the following link. 528 other people have already voted in support of restoring MNG.
Case 1 and 2 are not pertinent to this discussion.
Case 3 is where the question lies. If the program can be considered complete without GPL code, then can the program be non-GPL licensed?
For example, lets say I wrote a program has an abstraction layer for the UI, and had a plugin for a QT gui and a plugin for an XForms gui (ugh, remeber, its just an example).
Since QT is GPL licensed, does that mean that I need to make my program GPL licensed, even though it can be considered a complete work without any GPL code (via the XForms gui)?
This is where it becomes murky. The program is not GPL-code derived, but the GUI plugin may be considered so. If so, then does that require the program to be GPL licensed? It is pretty clear to me that the program should not be considered so (and GPL section 2 seems to agree).
Now what is the difference here between this and and a standard dynamic library implementation? I'm not sure there is one. I distribute a binary and it can link in code that meets a certain interface.
I not sure that implementing code to meet an interface should be considered creating a derivative work. If so, then things like lesstiff should not be legal.
But I could replace the GPL code with another library that follows the same interface. That says to me that they are seperate works programmed to an interface.
Hi. Can someone fill me in about this GPL question? The FSF claims that dynamic linking creates a derivative work and so all libraries have to be GPL-compatible.
What causes them to form this opinion? The GPL section 2 even states the following, which seems to contradict it:
These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works.
Is there any case law that states that dynamic linking creates a derivative work? Some kind of precident? Or is it just a fiction invented by the FSF people?
Can anyone point me to the actual license of this code? (Japanese or English) How about the source code? There seems to be plenty of binaries and specifications available for download.. but source?
Quake II.NET is a version of the popular Quake II game, ported to native and managed C++ using Microsoft® Visual Studio®.NET(TM) 2003
Can someone fill me in here? What is the big deal? Id has always used the MS compilers for that platform. So they just updated it to work with the latest release of the compiler. Wow, fancy shit.
Why would you want to put different programs all over the place? Your PATH would be huge.. and there's no point. There is a standard that describes how the filesystem should be laid out. Linux FHS
Running out of space? Increase your logical volume size and grow your filesystem.
Want to copy your configuration over? Copy all of/etc. Don't want to backup data that you can get from your distro? Just backup/home/var/etc and/usr/local. Very simple, well-defined ways of using the filesystem.
Guess what? Lots of smart people have been doing it this way. Guess what? It works.
Linux is not MacOS. MacOS X is not a Unix(tm) because its filesystem layout is all fucked up. That is why they failed the Unix conformance tests and that is why they are getting sued over using the term Unix.
Quake has some reliable messages. Chatting and console messages were reliable. The client ACKs them and the server will resend them if the client doesn't ACK. Its not hard.
Seriously, you just answered your own question. This doesn't mean that Debian can get rid of its non-US archive. It still contains things that are patented in the US or illegal due to the DMCA.
You can still have synchronicity with UDP. NetQuake uses UDP and has synchronicity. QuakeWorld has client-side prediction and positioning. It does not have synchroncity. This is why serious Quake 1 players only use NetQuake for competitions.
The 1.67-pound piece of fuel-tank foam insulation shot out of a 35-foot nitrogen-pressurized gun and slammed into a carbon-reinforced panel removed from shuttle Atlantis (search).
The countdown boomed through loudspeakers, and the crack of the foam coming out at more than 530 mph reverberated in the field where the test was conducted.
This really doesn't make any sense to me. How the hell would that piece of foam get moving at 530 mph in about 50 feet (between the nose and the wing)?
The only thing slowing down the foam relative to the shuttle is air resistance. As the shuttle goes higher, the air resistance gets lower. Can someone prove me wrong here? I don't know the specifics of the altitude or speed of the shuttle at the time of the strike.. so this is all guesswork.. but damn, it just seems wrong.
Could this be a convenient way for NASA to place the blame without investigating further?
Anything with a real-time pace is going to need to use UDP so that the whole stream doesn't block when one packet is dropped. By the time the packet would get resent, the information is no longer pertinent.
For those of you who are interested in picking up a game now and then, I highly recommend the ProQuake engine (GPL) and the CRMod++ DeathMatch competition framework.
These are modifications of NetQuake that were made to keep the original feel of Quake, with some minor improvements. None of the core of the game is changed with these packages. You can even connect to these machines with the original Quake client.
Slashdot Mirror
Who said nothing good comes from Texas?
:)
Well.. one is more than zero, right?
-molo
Wow, someone's trying to steal my name.
-molo
Niagra Falls! And Toronto!
One of the wonders of the world, and a large multicultural modern metropolitan city. Just don't bother with the US side of the falls.. or Buffalo for that matter.
-molo
You should check the Received: headers to make sure its actually from your machines. If its not, then dump it. Its pretty straightforward.
You can do the same thing with hotmail, yahoo, excite, etc. to make sure the mail is actually from those domains.
This, plus rejecting messages without a message-id header and html-only messages has caught the vast majority of my spam to date.
-molo
Does this version include MNG support? It was included, working, and then REMOVED from the trunk!
7 4
o w_ user&bug_id=18574
See bug 18574 for more information:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=185
If you agree that MNG support is useful, please vote for the bug, with the following link. 528 other people have already voted in support of restoring MNG.
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/votes.cgi?action=sh
-molo
PS: I would make real links out of it, but bugzilla denies anything with a slashdot.org referrer.
Fool! DVI is an encrypted data stream!
See this PDF for more information:
http://www.ddwg.org/if/data/0830991.pdf
-molo
Case 1 and 2 are not pertinent to this discussion.
Case 3 is where the question lies. If the program can be considered complete without GPL code, then can the program be non-GPL licensed?
For example, lets say I wrote a program has an abstraction layer for the UI, and had a plugin for a QT gui and a plugin for an XForms gui (ugh, remeber, its just an example).
Since QT is GPL licensed, does that mean that I need to make my program GPL licensed, even though it can be considered a complete work without any GPL code (via the XForms gui)?
This is where it becomes murky. The program is not GPL-code derived, but the GUI plugin may be considered so. If so, then does that require the program to be GPL licensed? It is pretty clear to me that the program should not be considered so (and GPL section 2 seems to agree).
Now what is the difference here between this and and a standard dynamic library implementation? I'm not sure there is one. I distribute a binary and it can link in code that meets a certain interface.
I not sure that implementing code to meet an interface should be considered creating a derivative work. If so, then things like lesstiff should not be legal.
-molo
Thanks, thats interesting. I'll take a look through those papers.
-molo
But I could replace the GPL code with another library that follows the same interface. That says to me that they are seperate works programmed to an interface.
-molo
What causes them to form this opinion? The GPL section 2 even states the following, which seems to contradict it:
This seems to contradict the GPL FAQ, Can I use the GPL for a plug-in for a non-free program?
Is there any case law that states that dynamic linking creates a derivative work? Some kind of precident? Or is it just a fiction invented by the FSF people?
Thanks
-molo
Can anyone point me to the actual license of this code? (Japanese or English) How about the source code? There seems to be plenty of binaries and specifications available for download.. but source?
Thanks
-molo
Quake 1 for DOS, yes.
I have an Indy with a R4000 MIPS cpu. It runs linux and is about the equivalent of a Pentium 120. It is a far cry from an 8068.
-molo
Quake II .NET is a version of the popular Quake II game, ported to native and managed C++ using Microsoft® Visual Studio® .NET(TM) 2003
Can someone fill me in here? What is the big deal? Id has always used the MS compilers for that platform. So they just updated it to work with the latest release of the compiler. Wow, fancy shit.
-molo
Why would you want to put different programs all over the place? Your PATH would be huge.. and there's no point. There is a standard that describes how the filesystem should be laid out. Linux FHS
/etc. Don't want to backup data that you can get from your distro? Just backup /home /var /etc and /usr/local. Very simple, well-defined ways of using the filesystem.
Running out of space? Increase your logical volume size and grow your filesystem.
Want to copy your configuration over? Copy all of
Guess what? Lots of smart people have been doing it this way. Guess what? It works.
Linux is not MacOS. MacOS X is not a Unix(tm) because its filesystem layout is all fucked up. That is why they failed the Unix conformance tests and that is why they are getting sued over using the term Unix.
-molo
Why? What benefit is there to moving binaries around like that?
-molo
Quake has some reliable messages. Chatting and console messages were reliable. The client ACKs them and the server will resend them if the client doesn't ACK. Its not hard.
-molo
No. Next question?
Seriously, you just answered your own question. This doesn't mean that Debian can get rid of its non-US archive. It still contains things that are patented in the US or illegal due to the DMCA.
-molo
You can still have synchronicity with UDP. NetQuake uses UDP and has synchronicity. QuakeWorld has client-side prediction and positioning. It does not have synchroncity. This is why serious Quake 1 players only use NetQuake for competitions.
-molo
From Fox News:
The 1.67-pound piece of fuel-tank foam insulation shot out of a 35-foot nitrogen-pressurized gun and slammed into a carbon-reinforced panel removed from shuttle Atlantis (search).
The countdown boomed through loudspeakers, and the crack of the foam coming out at more than 530 mph reverberated in the field where the test was conducted.
This really doesn't make any sense to me. How the hell would that piece of foam get moving at 530 mph in about 50 feet (between the nose and the wing)?
The only thing slowing down the foam relative to the shuttle is air resistance. As the shuttle goes higher, the air resistance gets lower. Can someone prove me wrong here? I don't know the specifics of the altitude or speed of the shuttle at the time of the strike.. so this is all guesswork.. but damn, it just seems wrong.
Could this be a convenient way for NASA to place the blame without investigating further?
-molo
Quake? UDP.
Halflife? UDP.
Starcraft? UDP.
Anything with a real-time pace is going to need to use UDP so that the whole stream doesn't block when one packet is dropped. By the time the packet would get resent, the information is no longer pertinent.
-molo
For those of you who are interested in picking up a game now and then, I highly recommend the ProQuake engine (GPL) and the CRMod++ DeathMatch competition framework.
These are modifications of NetQuake that were made to keep the original feel of Quake, with some minor improvements. None of the core of the game is changed with these packages. You can even connect to these machines with the original Quake client.
List of CRMod++ servers
-molo
TCP is not UDP. Games run on UDP. Blocking UDP port 80 will not interfere with TCP port 80.
-molo
Try a microwave oven. That will induce enough current in the device to melt/short its circuits.
Hopefully the thing the device is embedded in won't be harmed by the microwave.
Debian is assessing *ALL* of its packages for IPv6 support. This is a huge task.
See this page for details:
http://debian.fabbione.net/stat/
If you want to go right to the package status/statistics, go here:
http://debdev.fabbione.net/cgi-bin/getstats
-molo