Re: Commercial programs in Debian
On Friday 05 May 2006 06:53, Gudjon I. Gudjonsson wrote:
Hi
Sorry for the disturbion but I would like to mention some things.
I have been thinking about if it was possible to set up some bug list as a
kind of quality assurance for commercial programs in Debian. Most
commercial programs I have seen are only said to be compatible with RedHat
and sometimes SuSe. Such a list might make it more interesting for the
companies to port their applications to Debian and it would definetly make
my life easier:).
This is a most un-Debian-like thing to be doing. Instead of running non-Free
software on Debian, we should be seeking to create real Free alternatives
{although, demanding source code from vendors would certainly not hurt. I
have nothing in principle against the use of reasonable force in the course
of obtaining Source Code.}
Availability of Source Code is *the* single biggest reason why so much of the
software that is found in Debian can run on so many different architectures
{second only to NetBSD if I recall correctly?} That diversity is something
we should be proud of. *Un*availability of Source Code has already destroyed
a certain other operating system: every new release has to support a growing
heap of legacy code, and every insecurity ever exploited by a legitimate
program has to remain.
--
AJS
delta echo bravo six four at earthshod dot co dot uk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Commercial programs in Debian
You're both right...
Of course we want to promote free software, but without compatibility
with commercial applications, many solution stacks are missing key
components. That excludes Debian in an area where SUSE and Red Hat are
proud to stand up and say they support Oracle, SAP, or whatever.
The Debian way is to promote the availability of source code, but is
that more important than worldwide adoption in general? The focus
should be on capturing the audience first, and converting commercial
ISVs to the open source model after you have a captive audience. Am I
wrong?
-Original Message-
From: A J Stiles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 1:17 AM
To: debian-amd64@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Commercial programs in Debian
On Friday 05 May 2006 06:53, Gudjon I. Gudjonsson wrote:
Hi
Sorry for the disturbion but I would like to mention some things.
I have been thinking about if it was possible to set up some bug list
as a
kind of quality assurance for commercial programs in Debian. Most
commercial programs I have seen are only said to be compatible with
RedHat
and sometimes SuSe. Such a list might make it more interesting for the
companies to port their applications to Debian and it would definetly
make
my life easier:).
This is a most un-Debian-like thing to be doing. Instead of running
non-Free
software on Debian, we should be seeking to create real Free
alternatives
{although, demanding source code from vendors would certainly not hurt.
I
have nothing in principle against the use of reasonable force in the
course
of obtaining Source Code.}
Availability of Source Code is *the* single biggest reason why so much
of the
software that is found in Debian can run on so many different
architectures
{second only to NetBSD if I recall correctly?} That diversity is
something
we should be proud of. *Un*availability of Source Code has already
destroyed
a certain other operating system: every new release has to support a
growing
heap of legacy code, and every insecurity ever exploited by a legitimate
program has to remain.
--
AJS
delta echo bravo six four at earthshod dot co dot uk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Commercial programs in Debian
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 09:16:33AM +0100, A J Stiles wrote:
This is a most un-Debian-like thing to be doing. Instead of running non-Free
software on Debian, we should be seeking to create real Free alternatives
I would sure like to see a FOSS tool with the power of Gamess or Gaussian, or
Jaguar. But I don't expect I'll see it within the next decade.
{although, demanding source code from vendors would certainly not hurt. I
have nothing in principle against the use of reasonable force in the course
of obtaining Source Code.}
You can get the source for Gamess just fine, but the license doesn't
allow you to redistribute it, nor change it.
Availability of Source Code is *the* single biggest reason why so much of the
software that is found in Debian can run on so many different architectures
{second only to NetBSD if I recall correctly?} That diversity is something
we should be proud of. *Un*availability of Source Code has already destroyed
a certain other operating system: every new release has to support a growing
heap of legacy code, and every insecurity ever exploited by a legitimate
program has to remain.
--
Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a http://leitl.org
__
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820http://www.ativel.com
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Commercial programs in Debian
On Monday, 08.05.2006 at 03:27 -0500, Miller, Marc wrote: The Debian way is to promote the availability of source code, but is that more important than worldwide adoption in general? The focus should be on capturing the audience first, and converting commercial ISVs to the open source model after you have a captive audience. Am I wrong? Is one of Debian's (formal) aims worldwide adoption? I don't think it is... Should it be? That's less clear, but again I think not. If, by making a superior 'free' (in both senses) operating system *leads* to wider adoption, then that's a helpful side-effect, rather than a goal, in my opinion. Dave. -- Dave Ewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computing Manager, Cancer Epidemiology Unit Cancer Research UK / Oxford University PGP: CC70 1883 BD92 E665 B840 118B 6E94 2CFD 694D E370 Get key from http://www.ceu.ox.ac.uk/~davee/davee-ceu-ox-ac-uk.asc N 51.7518, W 1.2016 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Commercial programs in Debian
Hi again
Thank you Goswin and Alexander for nice ideas. I will do something into
these directions.
About the idea below. Debian and more or less Linux has now been banned
from my institution even if I have been able to solve a lot of peoples
problems with it.
Looking at a guy copying plots directly from some commercial program into
Word on a Windows computer, 10 to 100 times faster than I can do with gnuplot
makes me wonder if I am on the right track. The programs that I have
mentioned need to work on Debian and they need to work better with open
source programs if I will be able to continue use Debian or even Linux for
the desktop applications. I could switch to Windows, get a perfect GUI and
run the calculations on a Linux backend as most people do. It might save me
time.
Regards
Gudjon
This is a most un-Debian-like thing to be doing. Instead of running
non-Free software on Debian, we should be seeking to create real Free
alternatives {although, demanding source code from vendors would certainly
not hurt. I have nothing in principle against the use of reasonable force
in the course of obtaining Source Code.}
Availability of Source Code is *the* single biggest reason why so much of
the software that is found in Debian can run on so many different
architectures {second only to NetBSD if I recall correctly?} That
diversity is something we should be proud of. *Un*availability of Source
Code has already destroyed a certain other operating system: every new
release has to support a growing heap of legacy code, and every insecurity
ever exploited by a legitimate program has to remain.
--
AJS
delta echo bravo six four at earthshod dot co dot uk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [SPAM] Re: Commercial programs in Debian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Yes, I agree with RMS on this point. He has pointed out that using the GPL (an not a license that permits a comercial entity to abscond with the code) superior free (yes, in both senses) _software_ (o/s, utilities, applications) makes for a better world. High ideals to be sure. Dave Ewart wrote: On Monday, 08.05.2006 at 03:27 -0500, Miller, Marc wrote: The Debian way is to promote the availability of source code, but is that more important than worldwide adoption in general? The focus should be on capturing the audience first, and converting commercial ISVs to the open source model after you have a captive audience. Am I wrong? Is one of Debian's (formal) aims worldwide adoption? I don't think it is... Should it be? That's less clear, but again I think not. If, by making a superior 'free' (in both senses) operating system *leads* to wider adoption, then that's a helpful side-effect, rather than a goal, in my opinion. Dave. - -- Fielder George Dowding, Chief Iceworm.^. Debian/GNU Linux dba Iceworm Enterprises, Anchorage, Alaska /v\ etch Testing Since 1976 - Over 30 Years of Service. /( )\ User Number 269482 ^^-^^ irad 301256 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEXweX2kl99FX0AIkRAgE2AKCEds8Qc/OLq2ISpz7hPy2uGES/MwCdFKaY 00lTZjSY/T8obxC3yB01kME= =3fSH -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
commercial programs on debian
Hi, I'm agree with wour point of view. There is a lot of developpement to do on free software. but remember licences are for close market and to have captive user due to the data format, driver, no interoperative system this is the goal for commercial. Remember free will never tell that any think to do ;) With commercial the future may be : each time you want to do code you may paid a licence. If you dont paid it a crime. and you must to do what the software want (new slave) That's right debian is not perfect and we have some problem. There is great amelioration last years, and I hope it will continu. all people can contribute regards Michel Hi again Thank you Goswin and Alexander for nice ideas. I will do something into these directions. About the idea below. Debian and more or less Linux has now been banned from my institution even if I have been able to solve a lot of peoples problems with it. Looking at a guy copying plots directly from some commercial program into Word on a Windows computer, 10 to 100 times faster than I can do with gnuplot makes me wonder if I am on the right track. The programs that I have mentioned need to work on Debian and they need to work better with open source programs if I will be able to continue use Debian or even Linux for the desktop applications. I could switch to Windows, get a perfect GUI and run the calculations on a Linux backend as most people do. It might save me time. Regards Gudjon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#366002: aiccu: Lack of AMD64 package
006/5/5, Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I do not have an AMD64 machine to build the package for; and (apparently) none of the autobuilders want to build this package (probably because it is non-free). You'll need to convince an autobuilder to build it, or do yourself. if you choose the latter option I can walk you through the process. Anand Hi Anand For days I had been download and I installed in amd64 aiccu. Simply: apt-get - b source aiccu dpkg - i aiccu*deb Although in principle it seems that it works, I have not been able to prove it entirely because the pop one assigned sixxs is down Hear you have a reference to the files: ftp://ftp.nubiola.cat -- Pere Nubiola Radigales Telf: +34 656316974 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: VIA VT8251 low performance (was: ASUS A8V-MX)
Lennart Or with the speed of the drive /tmp is residing not on the sata hdd but on an old ide disk doing 7200 rpm. Still unable to install onto the sata hdd, as the installer isos are failing to detect the bus+hdd. Using the sata hdd as a storage area as of now. ;) -- 73s de Ragu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Commercial programs in Debian
On Monday 08 May 2006 17:19, A J Stiles wrote: The problem is, purchasing decisions are being made by people unqualified to make those decisions. That's true. In my country the public administration - including the university - is wasting public money (derived from taxation) in software that is found with debian, sometimes of better quality. They could better make donations to free software. However, there is scientific proprietary software from small softwarehouses that has decades of experience and development, is sold with accompanying source code, and solves problems that debian is quite far from solving. Again, don't ask me the names because I am not advertising (and I am user not softwarehouse) but I believe that such softwarehouses deserve full support. They have my support. In other words my point is not free software ueber alles, may point is serious software ueber alles (which implies getting the source code of the proprietary software, albeit with restriction to use it in connection with modifying the code to adapt the software to, say, the particular calculations). francesco pietra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Commercial programs in Debian
On Monday 08 May 2006 15:46, Francesco Pietra wrote:
However, there is scientific proprietary software from small softwarehouses
that has decades of experience and development, is sold with accompanying
source code, and solves problems that debian is quite far from solving.
Again, don't ask me the names because I am not advertising (and I am user
not softwarehouse) but I believe that such softwarehouses deserve full
support. They have my support.
There is an important distinction between software like this {the traditional
model, dating back to the days when Source Code was the only thing any two
systems might have in common}, and proprietary, closed-source software which
is distributed as a binary executable only {and requires a homogeneous
execution environment; something which has only really become possible
recently with the dominance of the 80%86 architecture and Windows}. It's not
Free software because it can't be distributed freely; but at least the vendor
respects the purchaser's right to inspect and modify the Source Code.
{I would also expect that such suppliers would be willing to accept
customer-contributed patches, even possibly giving credit for them in
subsequent versions.}
It is the vendors who treat their customers like children and refuse to let
them see exactly what they are running on their own computers who deserve the
greatest contempt. After all, would you buy any processed food that did not
include a list of the ingredients and the protein/fat/carbohydrate breakdown?
--
AJS
delta echo bravo six four at earthshod dot co dot uk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Commercial programs in Debian
On Monday 08 May 2006 18:34, A J Stiles wrote:
On Monday 08 May 2006 15:46, Francesco Pietra wrote:
However, there is scientific proprietary software from small
softwarehouses that has decades of experience and development, is sold
with accompanying source code, and solves problems that debian is quite
far from solving. Again, don't ask me the names because I am not
advertising (and I am user not softwarehouse) but I believe that such
softwarehouses deserve full support. They have my support.
There is an important distinction between software like this {the
traditional model, dating back to the days when Source Code was the only
thing any two systems might have in common}, and proprietary,
closed-source software which is distributed as a binary executable only
{and requires a homogeneous execution environment; something which has only
really become possible recently with the dominance of the 80%86
architecture and Windows}. It's not Free software because it can't be
distributed freely; but at least the vendor respects the purchaser's right
to inspect and modify the Source Code
I would like to intervene again about the last paragraph. I read your
statemente It's not Free software... but at least.. as placing Free
Software at a a higher (socially higher) level than Proprietary Software
(meant in the terms I specified above). If I read correctly, I disagree. I
disagree because that Proprietary Software allows me to do reseach work that
I could not otherwise carry out. The inventor who built the softwarehouse
lives from his invention and from his constant improvement of the product
(which generally is, how you could easily imagine, small business). Would you
not agree to support him? He does great service to the society. (again I
declare not to have any commercial involvment with any software house,
although from time to time i helped to improve the product by using it, while
I never claimed to get that acknowledged because I live from chemical
research).
francesco pietra
{I would also expect that such suppliers would be willing to accept
customer-contributed patches, even possibly giving credit for them in
subsequent versions.}
It is the vendors who treat their customers like children and refuse to let
them see exactly what they are running on their own computers who deserve
the greatest contempt. After all, would you buy any processed food that
did not include a list of the ingredients and the protein/fat/carbohydrate
breakdown?
--
AJS
delta echo bravo six four at earthshod dot co dot uk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
