Linux-Advocacy Digest #669, Volume #32 Tue, 6 Mar 01 07:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Linux on it's way back to (Bloody Viking)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Ian Davey)
Re: GPL Like patents. ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (Shane Phelps)
Re: State of linux distros (Stuart Krivis)
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (Donovan Rebbechi)
Lotus Notes Client for Linux (Jarmo Ahonen)
Re: [OT] .sig (was: Something Seemingly Simple.) ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Donovan Rebbechi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: 6 Mar 2001 11:15:00 GMT
On Mon, 05 Mar 2001 00:11:35 GMT, J Sloan wrote:
>pip wrote:
>
>> Doh!
>>
>> They are not buzzwords.
>
>Coulda fooled me -
>
>> I don't want to trade buzzwords. I want to illustrate the differences in
>> OS's as asked to.
>
>Ok, then instead of parroting the ms "innovation" buzzwords,
>explain why each of them is unique to the windows pc platform
>and why you don't think there is or could be a Unix equivalent.
No need to get defensive here -- and accusations that Pip is
"parroting the ms" anything are pretty weak.
He's basically talking about component programming. In Linux-speak,
it's a lot like DCOP, CORBA, and Bonobo.
Linux does indeed have component frameworks, but they are relatively new
(AFAIK, they had nothing like it prior to KDE and GNOME ).
While I'm having my $0.02, I'd really like to see a unified display/print
font management system.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Linux on it's way back to
Date: 6 Mar 2001 11:15:51 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: How will it "lose" ground on the desktop ? I mean from its current base
: that isn't likely to happen. From what I've seen, it appears to be
: growing.
With the MS-Monopoly(tm) on the desktop, Linux can only gain, even if it was
one desktop at a time. As of now, there are only a handful of deaktop Linux
users, though server users are plentiful.
: I suspect that another problem is that Linux hasn't been deployed on the
: corporate desktop, and *that* is where money for these applications
: come from. Home users are cheap, even more so for a sizeable chunk of
: the Linux user base (since a lot of users are students) The big dollars
: need to come from the corporate users, and until then, the Linux market
: is a dry well.
The home users often choose Linux becuse of the cost of software for that
other OS. IT students make up quite a bit of that home user market share. With
that, it's almost a surprise there's no GNU homework machine -ware yet. (:
Apart from the IT students and off-duty techies, the home user base is real
small.
: I don't think Linux will be a great business application platform for a
: while.
While we have OpenOffice and the like, the file format bullshit makes
conversion a major pain. It's like you have to open your business on Linux
right off the bat.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 11:20:13 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey) writes:
>>
>> But in that case how would I describe British aborigines?
>
>Pommies?
That describes the modern British, not the original inhabitants :-)
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GPL Like patents.
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 11:24:29 +0000
Les Mikesell wrote:
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The most important phrases are:
>> "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. But when you
>> distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work
>> based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the
>> terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend
>> to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of
>> who wrote it. "
>>
>> This means that as long as you keep your code separate from the GPL
>> code, you do not need to release your code as GPL. It is very clear.
>> It is only when you extend a GPL work, or embed your code into GPL
>> work, it MUST be GPL. This is a perfectly reasonable approach.
>
> The 'work as a whole' is the relevant issue. If there is a line of GPL'd
> code
> (or at least more than what might be excepted from copyright under fair
> use), included in a program of any size, it must all be licensed as GPL to
> be distributed. According to the FSF, all the libraries linked together
> at runtime constitute the work-as-a-whole, although there is a specific
> exception for the standard system libraries. Therefore you can't use
> any GPL code with anything that is not GPL'd compiled or linked
> into the work and redistribute it. Only the cleverly dual-licensed works
> that are allowed to be distributed under GPL or another less restricted
> license are able to escape this isolated fate.
I think I would like to introduce a specific example at this point. The
Tcl/Tk community are working on developing distributions of Tcl and Tk
that include a set of common and useful extensions, and one of them is
tclreadline which is an extension to interface the readline library to
Tcl. Tcl and Tk are both BSD-licensed, and readline (and presumably
tclreadline too) is GPL. And so, such a merger of support is impossible
since there is no way that we are about to change the license for Tcl and
Tk just so that we can add K3WL line-editing support[*], given that nobody
needs such a thing for Tcl to still be perfectly usable. Furthermore,
it is my distinct belief that the USAGE file distributed with the 4.1
release of readline supports my position, as does section 3 of the GPL.
(FYI, Readline 4.1 has 21769 lines of source code, Tcl 8.4a2 has 178311
lines of C source, and Tk 8.4a2 has 201980 lines of C source. Readline
would form approximately 5% of the aggregate, after allowing for extra
glueing code...)
GPL-ed code is open (anyone can read and modify the source) but not free
(since it cannot be combined with software available under the BSD license
in the manner described, and I've never seen *anyone* suggest that the
BSD license makes code non-open or non-free.) Kindly stop spreading FUD
and propaganda, mlw...
Donal.
[* I interpret section 2 of the GPL to mean that the existence of tclreadline
doesn't automatically force Tcl to be licensed under the GPL. Thanks
very much for *nothing* RMS! ]
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- With a complex beast like Swing, it's not just a matter of "What button
should I push", but rather "How do I put myself into a nice metamorphosis
so that I am deemed acceptable by the Swing Gods." -- Anonymous
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 22:40:28 +1100
Stuart Krivis wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 21:50:33 +1100, Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Chad, I don't think you are concerned about ssh security
> >> flaws, mainly because there is no windows ssh server.
> >>
> >
> >The really funny thing about this is that there *is* at least one Windows
> >ssh server version. There is a port of the ssh 1,2,x sshd which runs with
> >Cygwin (it only needs cygwin.dll, not the entire package). Data Fellows
> >*may* have an ssh server for Windows as well (it is US-only if there is one)
>
> Vandyke software has a very good sshd called VShell. I am a cheerleader
> for Vandyke because they really have a good line of products. SecureCRT
> is the best Windows SSH client I've found. Their support and customer
> service is quite good too. They're one of the best software vendors I've
> had contact with.
>
Are they allowed to export yet?
SecureCRT appeared to be one of the better Windows ssh clients a couple of
years back when I was looking for something, but I couldn't buy it ($^%#ing
stupid US crypto export laws). I wound up using puTTY for some jobs and
ZOC
for others.
Just checked their download page - it still asks you to fill in the munitions
export form. BUMMER :-(
> --
>
> Stuart Krivis
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart Krivis)
Subject: Re: State of linux distros
Date: 6 Mar 2001 06:42:18 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 04 Mar 2001 20:25:26 +0000, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>If it does what you need it to, then it is perfectly good. Late 80s
>>>hardware is perfect for low end jobs such as fire walls, routers,
>>>print/mail servers etc. Why shell out £1000 for a new print server when
>>>you have a good one hanging around?
>>
>> Cisco is still, AFAIK, selling a PIX with a P 200 inside. They charge a
>> lot of money for it and can't keep up with the demand.
>>
>> I wonder why people will spend so much for "obsolete" hardware? :-)
>
>Look at embedded hardware manufactureers (especially PC104 bus boards).
>386 and ISA (well, PC104---it's pretty much the same) are still going
>strong.
Yep. Motorola is making a lot of money selling 68K series CPUs for
embedded use. They work extremely well and are hardly obsolete.
--
Stuart Krivis
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: 6 Mar 2001 11:50:46 GMT
On 06 Mar 2001 06:18:54 GMT, Terry Porter wrote:
>On Mon, 05 Mar 2001 13:16:26 +0000,
>>As I said in another post, I regard printing as a OS subsystem, and as
>>all good OS people should know - a simple consistent API is essential.
>I'd say that a good consistent *user* interface is whats ultimately important,
>after all, programmers hardships don't count in the long run ?
Yes, they do. Better toolkits lead to better applications. Compare the
average KDE app to the average Tk app in terms of usability, for example.
from a developer's point of view, it's simply much easier to write a
user friendly application using Qt/KDE.
While UNIX is traditionaly thought of as a "programmer's OS", the
traditional development tools tend to be well suited to network
programming and text manipulation (which partially explains why UNIX is a
first rate server platform), however, in terms of development tools
suited for GUI development, it was never a leader (IMO)
KDE and GNOME are trying to change all that, and the usability benefits
are already beginning to show.
>>To be honest I am not viewing this as a "user" but as a programmer.
>You seem to jump between user and programmer to me, depending on your
>argument at the time.
The two are inter-related, that's probably why he's doing it. I think he
wants to be "the people's programmer", and not "the sysadmin's programmer".
>>Human Computer Interaction.
>>
>I found 9,100 hits yesterday when searching for 'windows gui inconsistent'
>on Hotbot. Windows is *not* the leader in HCI.
I don't think anyone in this thread is in the business of proclaiming Windows
as an ideal (or even "good") OS.
However, the fact that it's imperfect does not excuse the lack of
consistency in UNIX.
>> I would very much like to run many of my Windows
>>programs under Linux.
>I have found better Linux apps than the Windows apps I used to use, but it
>takes a while to locate them.
This depends a lot on the types of applications you are using. For the things
I do with a computer (mostly coding and writing papers), Linux is much
better. For someone who uses business applications all the time, it probably
isn't.
>> I have tried VMWare and WINE, but both still have
>>a long way to go (and I think that WINE makes more sense).
>Of course WINE has a long way to go, Windows apps are a moving target.
>(I've not tried VMWare, as I have no need for Windows apps)
VMWare works great IME. Of course, you'll need some memory to run two
OSs at once though, especially if one of them's NT (which is a pig)
>>Yes - these are all true. I am not (and never have) said that the GUI in
>>Windows was the best.
>Good, because I have those 9,100 hits (pls see above) to post here if you do ;-)
>
>> It is however better than the hotchpotch of tools
>>and utilities that face a new user to Linux.
>Is it ?
>I have to disagree, (not that you'd be shocked) as the Linux tools, while
>copious and terse (in some cases), allow a freedom and ease of use once learned
>that our mythical 'ex Windows user' can hardly imagine.
The keyword here is "once learned".
>> Those are the people who I
>>am concerned with. They would like to see a better OS - and the OS to
>>them means the GUI.
>You're concerned with 'new users' ?
>Does this mean you are attempting to sell something to them ?
Well, "barriers to entry" is a term the MS whiners carp about non-stop.
In the meantime, developers leave the whiners to whine, the DOJ to break
MS into little pieces, and focus on the "barriers to entry" that they can
remove -- namely the inconsistencies in the UI.
>> and userland apps
>The quality here does depend on the programmer/artist/engineer I think ?
Also depends on the quality of available toolkits. Shoddy development
tools means shoddy applications. Fantastic dev tools for writing
daemons and lousy ones for writing GUIs means great servers and
shoddy UIs.
OTOH, with GNOME and KDE/Trolltech writing top-notch dev tools, we're
seeing improvements here.
>>3) A great GUI
>I prefer 22 great GUI's, as we all have our own preferences. For instance
Well, let's see if we can do just one first.
>>4) Powerful CLI tools (we already have these)
>Only with Linux, Windows has no CLI tools of note.
Exactly. But the aim shouldn't be to merely surpass Windows. If we didn't
all believe that Linux had already achieved this, we wouldn't be using
it. (I certainly wouldn't be typing this over an SSH connection from
a Linux box to a netBSD box on my favourite newsreader, slrn)
>>> This comment is interesting from one who advocates a closed, proprietary,
>>> and unstable operating system.
>>
>>Sorry I am lost in your logic. Where do I advocate Windows?
>You have claimed that I say Windows or MS is 'evil', you say it has its good
>points. To me this is Windows advocacy.
No, it is not "Windows Advocacy". Acknowledging the good points of something
that you don't like very much (and I don't believe Pip likes Windows very
much) is a commendable sign of intellectual honesty.
The fact that he likes and uses Linux doesn't mean that he has to act
like a lobotomised partisan chimp, blindly chanting "Linux-good-Windows-bad"
in response to any question/comment about either.
In fact, I'd argue that if everyone really thought that Linux was perfect,
we just wouldn't move forward at all. I suppose this explains in part why
the hardcore advocates don't seem to have contributed anything. Why improve
something that's already perfect ? If people like this were put in charge,
we'd all be using twm.
>I have no problem with that, however it has to be informed critisism, or
>I cant help but reply, and attempt to work thru the often emotive
>statements, to get to the heart of the matter.
I thought his statements were reasonably informed, though some of the
earlier posts maybe didn't show it.
>Here on COLA, we are in the midst of a great deal of clever Windows
>advocacy posts, posted by people claiming to be Linux advocates, but
>whom are in fact Windows advocates, using this methodology as a cover
>to attempt to spread FUD about Linux.
You should know better. Pip has been posting here as an outspoken
Linux advocate for years.
>I'm not claiming you're such a poster, but time will tell.
It already has.
>>It is a simple matter of arguing for improvement and I am always
>>surprised at how much resistance there is to change or not adopting
>>great ideas because of their origin.
>
>Why argue for change on COLA ???????????????????
I don't know why he's doing it. I do it because I like arguing, and that's
about it. Most of what is said here is of no consequence IMO. I see it as
a sort of obscure debating club.
>Lets face it, Linux is HUGE, and one person can only input to a tiny segment
>of this OS as regards new ideas. I find it inconsistent that Linux of all
>OS's offers resistance to change,
I don't believe that it's true that Linux offers resistance to change,
and I agree with your reasoning here -- the people who want to take it
forward will do so, and those who blindly resist all change can go
sit in a corner and amuse themselves with twm and x-eyes.
>COLA on the other hand is largly, a lions den of infighting, a place to be
>when we *should* be doing our tax returns <groan>, and COLA is most definetly
>NOT Linux :)
I'd certainly hope not (-; If it was, I'd drop it like a hot potato. (And if
the quality of advocacy had any bearing on the quality of a product, I
would simply stop using computers !!!)
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: 6 Mar 2001 11:58:00 GMT
On Mon, 05 Mar 2001 13:16:26 +0000, pip wrote:
>> Typical Wintroll rhetoric ...sadly.
>
>That is quite insulting. I don't mind a lot of things but I do mind
>being branded as spewing "Wintroll rhetoric". If you don't like a
>Linux-user criticizing Linux then something in the community is lacking.
It's not the community, it's just this newsgroup. I think a lot of people
get defensive when it's pointed out that Linux isn't perfect. And then
they damn Linux with faint praise by pointing out that it's "better than
Windows". If the goal of Linux was merely to be "better than Windows",
I don't think any of the developers would have any work to do (because
if they chose Linux to develop on in the first place, they most likely
prefer it)
Yeah, I've been called "Wintroll" too. Probably the only thing anyone's
posted in this group that actually made me mad.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: Jarmo Ahonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.groupware.lotus-notes.misc
Subject: Lotus Notes Client for Linux
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 13:56:39 +0200
Hi,
If you out there would like to buy a Linux version
of Lotus Notes Client, please go and fill the
Notes Client Platform survey at
www.notes.net
Let IBM/Lotus/Iris know that you want a
native Linux client. (At least my employer
would like to buy quite a few.)
Best regards
Jarmo Ahonen
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] .sig (was: Something Seemingly Simple.)
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 11:54:37 +0000
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> I never mentioned punishment. I just asked if it went into the record.
> I think I recall police in movies saying "he got arrested twice, once
> indicted, not convicted". I suppose that is in the record.
>
> So, it would add to the record's length. So it *is* possible to have a
> three-feet record consisting of 0 convictions, and get in the army
> because, as you said, if it ain't convicted, it can't be held against him.
I believe (in the UK at least) that criminal records do not contain any
mention at all of things which the individual has been acquitted of. I
was also under the (apparently mistaken) impression that the size of a
criminal record was recorded by the *depth* of paper on which it was
written... :^)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- With a complex beast like Swing, it's not just a matter of "What button
should I push", but rather "How do I put myself into a nice metamorphosis
so that I am deemed acceptable by the Swing Gods." -- Anonymous
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: 6 Mar 2001 12:03:03 GMT
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001 09:38:24 +0100, Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) writes:
>> On 5 Mar 2001 06:13:10 GMT, Andres Soolo wrote:
>>
>> However, forcing everyone to give away their software would be an act of
>> dispossesion parallel to that which took place in communist revolutions.
>
>It would be. But no-one advocates that force should be used.
>Suggesting that the use of the GPL is the same as using force
>is about as correct as saying that Microsoft forces you to
>buy Windows at gun-point.
There are those who call for copyright to be abolished. I'm not sure
exactly where RMS stands here. Some have posted that he wants copyright
abolished, but I haven't seen it from an unbiased or authoritative
source.
>>>Actually, FSF doesn't seem to have a problem with software on very
>>>narrow vertical markets--like a programmer is hired specifically to
>>>a single company.
>>
>> But they have a problem with selling software.
>
>They have not. The GPL even stipulates that it's not concerned
>with the price, only with the continued availability of the
>source code, and all the derivative works of the source code,
>if these are distributed.
Which makes it pretty hard to sell licenses.
> You can consider the requirement to
>make the source code of derivative works available a kind of
>monetary compensation, even.
It's not monetary though you could argue that it's "compensation".
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
