Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 08:47:58AM +0200, Etienne Charlier wrote:
0. It's quite amazing that such a great product has been developed
and integrated by a few people during part time ( when do they sleep
??? )
Yes it is a fantastic project. I only want the distribution presented in
a way that makes it possible for more people to modify or contribute to
the projects development.
1. I'm not a leaf contributor. I just use the binaries ... and I like them
You looked at the sourceforge.net but you missed the most usefull part
of the site the mailing list archive ( a gold mine for the one who
try to use it )
Explaining how I arrived at my problems would be very difficult and time
consuming, because the issues come from a very heavily modified distro, I
don't expect people to take the time to understand all my changes. What
I would like to see is an environment where I can communicate all this in
a standard way so it's practical for others to think about what might be
wrong with my picture.
I did write an image extractor which I'll post shortly, this might help
with such communications.
2 This list was the most polite and fair a ever seen ... till you came
( maybe i'm a little bit too hard but I cannot express it more correctly )
(remember the dns resolver thread ??? )
I apologies if I hurt anyone's feelings. If I understand your meaning,
I do try to be polite at all times, if there is one place I'm least
polite it's probably technical communications. Sometimes politeness can
be difficult in technical forum, I can work on this. I really appreciate
responses (public/private) that engage the issues; I'm not out to make
anyone feel bad and I see no benefit from that anyway. No promises, but
your feelings for me might improve. I hope so anyway.
3 You seem very upset by not being able to {use | install} bering on your
system and you feel better if you can put the responsability on someone
else.
I'm using Bering very differently than most users, isp verses home
/ small office. My needs are very different, it would be good if
modifications and sharing thereof were easier. This is what I'm working
towards.
// George
--
GEORGE GEORGALIS, System Admin/Architectcell: 347-451-8229
Security Services, Web, Mail,mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
File, Print, DB and DNS Servers. http://www.galis.org/george
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
___
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, George Georgalis wrote:
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 08:47:58AM +0200, Etienne Charlier wrote:
[...]
3 You seem very upset by not being able to {use | install} bering on your
system and you feel better if you can put the responsability on someone
else.
I'm using Bering very differently than most users, isp verses home
/ small office. My needs are very different, it would be good if
modifications and sharing thereof were easier. This is what I'm working
towards.
Bering uses the Debian networking scripts (ifupdown), which I do not think
are intended only for home/small office. I also think Shorewall is a very
flexible tool. I could empathize more with your NIH point of view if you
were working with Dachstein, which is very optimized for small network
use.
The one area that LEAF has not been so good at has been redundant
connections. The most robust approach I have seen so far involves scripts
customized to detect specific ping failures that invoke ifup and ifdown
and shorewall restart as appropriate. What has been lacking are EGP
protocol support, I suspect because people doing EGP work haven't been
using Bering. This is a bit of chicken and egg problem. I don't know
details, but Zebra doesn't appear to be up to kernel 2.4 yet.
Regarding difficulty changing Bering: when you get used to the
load-from-scratch approach used in Bering, I think you should find that
its operation is very transparent if you are familiar with Linux and
SysV-style operation. The RCDLINKS bit is a small stumbling block, and
the package format is unusual, but other than that it seems very similar
to my Debian workstation.
The CVS tree will be a valuable addition to the LEAF resources.
Meanwhile, most of us have learned LEAF variants by poking around running
LEAF boxes rather than dissecting and building packages offline... so by
the time we do get around to the package structure it makes a little more
sense. Building a box for remote installation your first time out is
pretty ambitious, particularly when you choose to start replacing major
functionality at the same time.
---
Jeff NewmillerThe . . Go Live...
DCN:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Basics: ##.#. ##.#. Live Go...
Live: OO#.. Dead: OO#.. Playing
Research Engineer (Solar/BatteriesO.O#. #.O#. with
/Software/Embedded Controllers) .OO#. .OO#. rocks...2k
---
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
___
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 08:42:07AM +0200, Jacques Nilo wrote: Georges: If you do not feel confortable using Bering, please do not use it. Bering has been developped by me and Eric as a hobby, on our spare time outside of our regular jobs. I do feel it is an innovative quality project. Please don't take my criticism personally. I really intended my remarks as constructive criticism. I don't want this thread to get out of hand so I'll refrain from adding details and focus on being as constructive as I can. What invoked my letter was realization that I needed to script a package extractor/compressor and that many of the hurdles I have overcome would have been much easier if the distro (and I should speak only of Bering, because I need the 2.4 kernel, and it's the only leaf I've used.) was presented differently. For example, as a tgz that extracts into an expanded root filesystem (or root file system for each package; not sure which would work) and scripts to make the packages and make a floppy image with a new timestamp. This would afford quick maintenance and modifications in a full environment. I will likely put this together from scratch if none of the components already exist to do this. (BTW - I am very pro opensource/GNU and don't feel the need to keep under wraps any of my work, accept that which might be a direct conflict of interest with my employer. I can't imagine being involved with any software-for-sale project, either. I didn't mean, I'm here to enforce GNU as much as I meant, This GPL project seems different then other GPL projects I've worked on, it's difficult to customize the package.) A lot of a effort has been put in the doc: see the installation user's guide. Most of technical related questions are answered (if time permits) with the help of the LEAF community through the mailing list. A developer's manual is on my todo list but it also a fact that people are for some strange reason always quicker to criticize that to help writing up a chapter of the user's guide ... I'm sorry. I know this is true. Maybe I can contribute some doc at some point in the near future. I have picked up and set down some version of LRP several times in the last ~18 months, always with the feeling of being overwhelmed with links to sites of documentation which ultimately didn't answer my question. It was your guide Jacques, that has been the most helpful. I didn't mean to make any point regarding doc beyond that a 100 line quick start would be really helpful: some definitions, anomalies, intro to package format and image manipulation -- just the sundry facts, what to do without the details of how it's done. I would provide it today if I could, but maybe in a few weeks :) I will try to fully address everyone else's opinions of my post soon; but after reading them I would like to briefly say, 1) criticism (and not necessarily constructive criticism) is an important aspect of opensource development and peer review, and does not necessarily correlate with gratitude. And 2) I see personal attacks in public forum shortsighted and hypocritical. Bon Bastille Day! (my French is almost nonexistent but for those celebrating, I wish you a joyous independence) Regards, // George Le Samedi 13 Juillet 2002 07:55, George Georgalis a écrit : Is Bering GNU? I'm beginning to have my doubts. Where is /usr/src/linux/.config? Where are the other compile time options for other binaries? Just how was Bering_1.0-rc3_img_bering_1680.bin made? After spending a good part of a week, and _all_ day Friday getting up a Bering router before a deadline -- subsequently missing the first day of a conference http://h2k2.org -- I looked back at what was the problem. I discovered I was hacking around a product (the Bering image) much like the manner of before I used Linux. I have this disk image, that I mount to find, compressed archives, containing finely tailored scripts and a handful of binaries. Together they make up the GNU Bering. (And maybe other leaf versions as well.) I have hunted all over http://leaf-project.org and http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ for the source, or even a file that says version xx.yy.zz of busybox was compiled with the following patch and compile time options. Or maybe a tgz of the /usr/local/src/bering where the image was made? Nothing. I find myself writing scripts to extract and compress lrp files. Surely everyone doesn't gzip -c9 what they made by tar cf after mounting and extracting their first floppy image? Is this the intended way to indoctrinate new developers to the old school? I even asked a few well read LUG groups what the lrp format was, or how I could run the lrcfg that I read about without actually booting the distro. Nobody knew because the design is not conducive to group development, it's intended use is like that of proprietary software -- take the binary, configure it with the configuration menu and be like everyone else. Okay, I just found
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
Georges: If you do not feel confortable using Bering, please do not use it. Bering has been developped by me and Eric as a hobby, on our spare time outside of our regular jobs. Bering is also based on the tremendous work done previously by the LRP LEAF community: Dave Cinege, Charles Steinkuehler to name a few and also includes as a key element Tom Eastep's Shorewall which is - to my opinion - one of the best designed and supported iptable based firewall product. A lot of a effort has been put in the doc: see the installation user's guide. Most of technical related questions are answered (if time permits) with the help of the LEAF community through the mailing list. A developper's manual is on my todo list but it also a fact that people are for some strange reason always quicker to criticize that to help writing up a chapter of the user's guide ... Jacques Le Samedi 13 Juillet 2002 07:55, George Georgalis a écrit : Is Bering GNU? I'm beginning to have my doubts. Where is /usr/src/linux/.config? Where are the other compile time options for other binaries? Just how was Bering_1.0-rc3_img_bering_1680.bin made? After spending a good part of a week, and _all_ day Friday getting up a Bering router before a deadline -- subsequently missing the first day of a conference http://h2k2.org -- I looked back at what was the problem. I discovered I was hacking around a product (the Bering image) much like the manner of before I used Linux. I have this disk image, that I mount to find, compressed archives, containing finely tailored scripts and a handful of binaries. Together they make up the GNU Bering. (And maybe other leaf versions as well.) I have hunted all over http://leaf-project.org and http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ for the source, or even a file that says version xx.yy.zz of busybox was compiled with the following patch and compile time options. Or maybe a tgz of the /usr/local/src/bering where the image was made? Nothing. I find myself writing scripts to extract and compress lrp files. Surely everyone doesn't gzip -c9 what they made by tar cf after mounting and extracting their first floppy image? Is this the intended way to indoctrinate new developers to the old school? I even asked a few well read LUG groups what the lrp format was, or how I could run the lrcfg that I read about without actually booting the distro. Nobody knew because the design is not conducive to group development, it's intended use is like that of proprietary software -- take the binary, configure it with the configuration menu and be like everyone else. Okay, I just found the developer.rtf and scanned the whole thing. Formidable task, but I only see part of the forest and none of the trees. I already know linux and there seem to be some very specific LRP details in there, but will it be done before it's out of date? I'm not saying produce a `./configure make make image` but if the environment for building the release was published, or easier to find, I'm sure there would be a lot more community support. At one point I kicked myself for not looking in CVS before, but when I got in there, was in disbelief -- no source, only doc. So now I have problems with my image to resolve, why do those Belkin cards detect as reltek under RH but, none of the Bering modules will work with them??? How will I ever get my tulips back from my boss so I can test an image at home? What am I going to do about making an image and quickly changing a few parameters (ssh host keys, network, firewall and other site information) or major structure (LaBera, ppp, ipsec, dns) without spending a ton of time hand extracting and compressing components? I'm going to make my own distribution. reBering. Complete with scripts to mount and extract all the subcomponents, global configure, mix'n'match packages, compress and unmount. Only I don't think I can call it GNU because since I'm in a hurry, I won't have time to reverse engineer the compile time options and source. I'd rather work on putting it on an eprom anyway. In all sincerity, Bering is very cool. It could just be a lot better if it was more in the spirit of _encouraging_ open source development rather than barley qualifying, actually I bet if it was audited, it wouldn't pass. If there are scripts to tar and gzip a lrp package, why aren't they part of a tools.tgz right beside package_src.tgz and compile_configs.tgz next to the Leaf_UML packages and extraction instructions for odd archives? I know asking for doc is a lot, but maintaining a file of command lines used to make the binaries from source would be an excellent first step. // George --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
Le Samedi 13 Juillet 2002 07:55, George Georgalis a écrit : Is Bering GNU? I'm beginning to have my doubts. Where is /usr/src/linux/.config? http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/bering/rc3/ http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/bering/rc3/patches/ JN --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
Hi,
Forgive me my poor english. I cannot express my ideas very cleareley.
( at least not with the calm and precision used by Ray ;-) )
0. It's quite amazing that such a great product has been developed
and integrated by a few people during part time ( when do they sleep
??? )
1. I'm not a leaf contributor. I just use the binaries ... and I like them
You looked at the sourceforge.net but you missed the most usefull part
of the site the mailing list archive ( a gold mine for the one who
try to use it )
2 This list was the most polite and fair a ever seen ... till you came
( maybe i'm a little bit too hard but I cannot express it more correctly )
(remember the dns resolver thread ??? )
3 You seem very upset by not being able to {use | install} bering on your
system and you feel better if you can put the responsability on someone
else.
Just my 0.02.
PS: Bering crew: Great job...
Etienne Charlier
- Original Message -
From: George Georgalis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 7:55 AM
Subject: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
Is Bering GNU?
I'm beginning to have my doubts. Where is /usr/src/linux/.config? Where
http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/bering/rc3/Bering_1.0-rc3.config
are the other compile time options for other binaries? Just how was
Bering_1.0-rc3_img_bering_1680.bin made?
After spending a good part of a week, and _all_ day Friday getting up a
Bering router before a deadline -- subsequently missing the first day of
a conference http://h2k2.org -- I looked back at what was the problem. I
discovered I was hacking around a product (the Bering image) much like
the manner of before I used Linux. I have this disk image, that I mount
to find, compressed archives, containing finely tailored scripts and a
handful of binaries. Together they make up the GNU Bering. (And maybe
other leaf versions as well.)
I have hunted all over http://leaf-project.org and
http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ for the source, or even a file that says
version xx.yy.zz of busybox was compiled with the following patch and
http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/bering/rc2/Config.h
compile time options. Or maybe a tgz of the /usr/local/src/bering where
the image was made? Nothing. I find myself writing scripts to extract
and compress lrp files. Surely everyone doesn't gzip -c9 what they made
by tar cf after mounting and extracting their first floppy image? Is
this the intended way to indoctrinate new developers to the old school?
I even asked a few well read LUG groups what the lrp format was, or
how I could run the lrcfg that I read about without actually booting
the distro. Nobody knew because the design is not conducive to group
development, it's intended use is like that of proprietary software --
take the binary, configure it with the configuration menu and be like
everyone else.
Okay, I just found the developer.rtf and scanned the whole thing.
Formidable task, but I only see part of the forest and none of the
trees. I already know linux and there seem to be some very specific LRP
details in there, but will it be done before it's out of date? I'm
not saying produce a `./configure make make image` but if the
environment for building the release was published, or easier to find,
I'm sure there would be a lot more community support. At one point I
kicked myself for not looking in CVS before, but when I got in there,
was in disbelief -- no source, only doc.
So now I have problems with my image to resolve, why do those Belkin
cards detect as reltek under RH but, none of the Bering modules will
work with them??? How will I ever get my tulips back from my boss so I
can test an image at home? What am I going to do about making an image
and quickly changing a few parameters (ssh host keys, network, firewall
and other site information) or major structure (LaBera, ppp, ipsec,
dns) without spending a ton of time hand extracting and compressing
components? I'm going to make my own distribution. reBering. Complete
with scripts to mount and extract all the subcomponents, global
configure, mix'n'match packages, compress and unmount. Only I don't
think I can call it GNU because since I'm in a hurry, I won't have time
to reverse engineer the compile time options and source. I'd rather work
on putting it on an eprom anyway.
In all sincerity, Bering is very cool. It could just be a lot better
if it was more in the spirit of _encouraging_ open source development
rather than barley qualifying, actually I bet if it was audited, it
wouldn't pass. If there are scripts to tar and gzip a lrp package,
why aren't they part of a tools.tgz right beside package_src.tgz and
compile_configs.tgz next to the Leaf_UML packages and extraction
instructions for odd archives? I know asking for doc is a lot, but
maintaining a file of command lines used to make the
RE: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
George, I'm kind of curios. Why did you feel the need to cross-post to lists not related to LEAF? Odd, one in San Diego and the other in New York? How incredibly odd. Did you want encompass the United States, some LEAF developers are not US citizens you know, you might want to cross post to lists in France, Germany, Brazil and Japan too. If you had leaf related questions, why did not ask them on the publicly available LEAF-USER list and not copy email lists that the VAST majority of people on said lists are not subscribed too? Instead of asking specific questions you start off with a general leading question and then launch into an attack. I name thee TROLL! I thought about not sending this message, but you just didn't appear to do your research and quite frankly there is a hell of a lot of FREE support on the leaf-user lists. I note that http://www.mail-archive.com/cgi-bin/htsearch?method=andformat=shortconfig=l eaf-user_lists_sourceforge_netrestrict=exclude=words=George+Georgalis shows that a lot of folks spent a LOT of FREE time helping you out. Never the less, these messages are in the archive so I will endeavor to answer some of your attacks ^H^H^H^H^H^H concerns and ignore others at my whim. And then, quite possibly, black hole any further messages from you because I can and life is not fair. :) I will probably also supply frivolous information to amuse myself because it's late and I am occasionally a random sentence generator. At least that may provide amusement to some. Leaf-project is several different distro's with similar and differing objectives. Your inability to instantly gain all knowledge of it without spending some time doing YOUR homework is tiresome. You assume that because you think you know Linux that you should be able to instantly understand 1 of 5 specialized distributions in the LEAF project and the compromises necessary to fit them on a floppy disk? I wish I had your knowledge and learning skills. No, wait... No I don't. Note: I am speaking for myself because you irked me and it's late where I am. Comments inline marked sp -Original Message- From: George Georgalis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 10:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU? I'm beginning to have my doubts. Where is /usr/src/linux/.config? Where are the other compile time options for other binaries? Just how was Bering_1.0-rc3_img_bering_1680.bin made? sp doubt away and use another project. OR ask politely and you directed to the information. Volunteer projects have a problem - NO PAID SUPPORT! If you perceive a lack, ask/gather the information, do a write up and submit it for inclusion in the FAQ's/Documentation. I will endeavor to direct you to some of the documentation you obviously missed on your first or second perusal of our site. I think the site is up to 2-3GB. After spending a good part of a week, and _all_ day Friday getting up a Bering router before a deadline -- subsequently missing the first day of a conference http://h2k2.org -- I looked back at what was the problem. I discovered I was hacking around a product (the Bering image) much like the manner of before I used Linux. I have this disk image, that I mount to find, compressed archives, containing finely tailored scripts and a handful of binaries. Together they make up the GNU Bering. (And maybe other leaf versions as well.) sp Nothing personal but I am reminded of an old IT saying. You lack of planning does not necessarily constitute an emergency on my part ESPECIALLY when you're NOT paying for my time! Why would anyone but you care that you were late to something? Did you get fired? Why would LEAF be relevant to your not planning sufficient testing and implementation time in a project? Configuration is through lrcfg. Not the same as a full distro of Linux. sp My first experience was with the Eigerstein distro and I had it set up in 25 minutes. At the time, I didn't even know what Linux was. sp Leaf, being specialized, oddly enough, has to make compromises on how some things work. sp Perhaps the Bering user doc was to much for you http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/busers.html sp Perhaps the Bering Installation guide was insufficient http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/binstall.html I have hunted all over http://leaf-project.org and http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ for the source, or even a file that says version xx.yy.zz of busybox was compiled with the following patch and compile time options. Or maybe a tgz of the /usr/local/src/bering where the image was made? Nothing. I find myself writing scripts to extract and compress lrp files. Surely everyone doesn't gzip -c9 what they made by tar cf after mounting and extracting their first floppy image? Is this the intended way to indoctrinate new developers to the old school?
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 22:55, George Georgalis wrote: Is Bering GNU? George, Yes. I have hunted all over http://leaf-project.org and http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ for the source, snip I even asked a few well read LUG groups what the lrp format was, or how I could run the lrcfg that I read about without actually booting the distro. snip Did you traverse our http://leaf-project.org/pub and http://leaf-project.org/devel trees? A lot of our content is not indexed in our current phpWebSite, also note that some of our content is on our SourceForge project site. If you have problems locating something please try Google site search. If that fails ask us and we'll gladly point you in the right direction. This will search our website on the SF shell for Bering. http://www.google.com/ bering site:leaf.sourceforge.net Web sites http://leaf-project.org/ VHOST for http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ SourceForge project pages http://sourceforge.net/projects/leaf CVS http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/leaf/ Okay, I just found the developer.rtf and scanned the whole thing. Good. Did it help? If not, please submit a Bug report or Patch to the current documentation. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=13751 Contributions page: http://leaf-project.org/mod.php?mod=userpagemenu=16page_id=22 At one point I kicked myself for not looking in CVS before, but when I got in there, was in disbelief -- no source, only doc. We're still working on a structure for our src tree in CVS. You're welcome to participate in our src tree structure discussion. I'm going to make my own distribution. reBering. Complete with scripts to mount and extract all the subcomponents, global configure, mix'n'match packages, compress and unmount. Only I don't think I can call it GNU because since I'm in a hurry, I won't have time to reverse engineer the compile time options and source. I don't think this is permitted under the GPL. Once code is under the GPL license it can only be released under another license if all the programmers that contributed code agree to the change. You may want to look at Oxygen its code is MIT licensed. You may want to take a look at our development model. New releases/branches are welcome here. Evolution as a project development model http://www.mail-archive.com/leaf-devel%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04541.html In all sincerity, Bering is very cool. It could just be a lot better if it was more in the spirit of _encouraging_ open source development rather than barley qualifying, actually I bet if it was audited, it wouldn't pass. If you feel this way, why haven't you contacted SF or the FSF? SouceForge hosts all of our content, and they only allow hosting of OSS compliant code. If there are scripts to tar and gzip a lrp package, why aren't they part of a tools.tgz right beside package_src.tgz and compile_configs.tgz next to the Leaf_UML packages and extraction instructions for odd archives? I know asking for doc is a lot, but maintaining a file of command lines used to make the binaries from source would be an excellent first step. Wouldn't a src tree in cvs be better? This is what we're working toward. -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
George: I just wanted to point out the obvious: Is Bering GNU? [snip] ...I know asking for doc is a lot, but maintaining a file of command lines used to make the binaries from source would be an excellent first step. While I'm no expert, this is a new definition of GNU for me: requiring a file of command lines used to make [all of] the binaries [in the whole distribution]. The source code for Bering (kernel, modules, patches, packages, etc), and all of the precompiled binaries that come with it, is freely available to anyone who requests it. Further, any modifications to GPL'd code that Jacques and Eric made are also GPL'd. That's GNU. Perhaps you are more accustomed to compiling a standalone binary, most of which utilize a ./configure script (itself a GPL'd item), at the command line of a full *nix distro. However, adhering to such a *convention* (that's all it is) is not mandated within the precepts of the Copyleft. Nothing is more or less GNU for doing it or not doing it in this fashion. Also, obviously, you're quite welcome to take Bering, modify it as you wish, put it on an EEPROM for your own use, and never distribute it. That's GNU too. -Scott PS: Bering being central to LEAF, I've restricted my cross posting to just the LEAF lists. --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
On Sat, 13 Jul 2002 01:55:44 -0400 George Georgalis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In all sincerity, Bering is very cool. It could just be a lot better if it was more in the spirit of _encouraging_ open source development rather than barley qualifying, actually I bet if it was audited, it wouldn't pass. If there are scripts to tar and gzip a lrp package, why aren't they part of a tools.tgz right beside package_src.tgz and compile_configs.tgz next to the Leaf_UML packages and extraction instructions for odd archives? I know asking for doc is a lot, but maintaining a file of command lines used to make the binaries from source would be an excellent first step. http://www.franzdoodle.com/bering/dev.tgz Here is the development environment I use to customize Bering for compact flash. If it is useful, I will contribute it to the project. It is incomplete, and lacking documentation (two of your pet peeves, I see), but I am working hard at a day job in an economic downturn and the projects I am involved in at work have been steered away from embedded linux since I started on the project /excuse It is only a framework, somewhat quick and dirty. I will write a doc if it looks useful to anyone at first glance. I suspect, however, that it is not that much different than what others might be using for their custom projects. I hope that this helps some. -- Chad Carr [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
On Sat, 2002-07-13 at 06:53, Mike Noyes wrote: On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 22:55, George Georgalis wrote: Is Bering GNU? George, Yes. Clarification: Bering is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), and would be described by FSF people as GPL-covered software. It is not a GNU program, or GNU software. Bering has not been contributed to the FSF. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html GPL-covered software The GNU GPL (General Public License) (20k characters) is one specific set of distribution terms for copylefting a program. The GNU Project uses it as the distribution terms for most GNU software. GNU programs ``GNU programs'' is equivalent to GNU software. A program Foo is a GNU program if it is GNU software. GNU software GNU software is software that is released under the auspices of the GNU Project. Most GNU software is copylefted, but not all; however, all GNU software must be free software. If a program is GNU software, we also say that it is a GNU program. Some GNU software is written by staff of the Free Software Foundation, but most GNU software is contributed by volunteers. Some contributed software is copyrighted by the Free Software Foundation; some is copyrighted by the contributors who wrote it. It is doubtful that any of our releases meet GNU Coding Standards at this time. GNU Coding Standards http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards_toc.html However, Bering does comply with GPL licensing. -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
At 01:43 PM 7/13/02 -0700, Mike Noyes wrote: On Sat, 2002-07-13 at 06:53, Mike Noyes wrote: On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 22:55, George Georgalis wrote: Is Bering GNU? George, Yes. Clarification: Bering is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), and would be described by FSF people as GPL-covered software. It is not a GNU program, or GNU software. Bering has not been contributed to the FSF. Mike -- I stayed out of this morass up to now mainly because you and the other LEAF folks have responded so well to it. But your message above (and some of the others, at least implicitly) reads to me like it is fuzzing up one detail. Am I mistaken, or doesn't Bering (and Dachstein, and perhaps the other variants) use some components with idiosyncratic licenses that don't meet the standards (e.g, the DFSG or OSG criteria) for either free or Open Source licensing ? I'm thinking in particular of the DJB stuff (dnscache, tinydns) and one of the intrusion detection packages. I also recall that there used to be issues with DoC module code, though I believe current DoC support uses OSG-compliant licensing. As I recall -- though I am no more expert in reading and interpreting licenses than any of us -- an overall distribution can be GPL'd but include some components that themselves are under different licenses (not ANY other license, but SOME other licenses). Does that distinction not apply to these packages (and maybe others)? -- ---Never tell me the odds!-- Ray Olszewski-- Han Solo Palo Alto, California, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
On Sat, 2002-07-13 at 14:57, Ray Olszewski wrote: At 01:43 PM 7/13/02 -0700, Mike Noyes wrote: On Sat, 2002-07-13 at 06:53, Mike Noyes wrote: On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 22:55, George Georgalis wrote: Is Bering GNU? George, Yes. Clarification: Bering is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), and would be described by FSF people as GPL-covered software. It is not a GNU program, or GNU software. Bering has not been contributed to the FSF. Mike -- I stayed out of this morass up to now mainly because you and the other LEAF folks have responded so well to it. Ray, I'm starting to wish I had also. :-( But your message above (and some of the others, at least implicitly) reads to me like it is fuzzing up one detail. Am I mistaken, or doesn't Bering (and Dachstein, and perhaps the other variants) use some components with idiosyncratic licenses that don't meet the standards (e.g, the DFSG or OSG criteria) for either free or Open Source licensing ? I'm thinking in particular of the DJB stuff (dnscache, tinydns) and one of the intrusion detection packages. I also recall that there used to be issues with DoC module code, though I believe current DoC support uses OSG-compliant licensing. Correct, but I thought we were discussing the code created by our project members, and not code packaged by us. I agree the DJB packages may have some problems, but I think we came to the conclusion earlier that this was a borderline case. The M-Systems DoC driver license was unacceptable, and was never distributed from our SF site. As I recall -- though I am no more expert in reading and interpreting licenses than any of us -- an overall distribution can be GPL'd but include some components that themselves are under different licenses (not ANY other license, but SOME other licenses). Does that distinction not apply to these packages (and maybe others)? I believe that is the case. -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] is Bering GNU?
On Sat, 2002-07-13 at 15:27, Mike Noyes wrote: On Sat, 2002-07-13 at 14:57, Ray Olszewski wrote: Am I mistaken, or doesn't Bering (and Dachstein, and perhaps the other variants) use some components with idiosyncratic licenses that don't meet the standards (e.g, the DFSG or OSG criteria) for either free or Open Source licensing ? I'm thinking in particular of the DJB stuff (dnscache, tinydns) and one of the intrusion detection packages. I also recall that there used to be issues with DoC module code, though I believe current DoC support uses OSG-compliant licensing. Correct, but I thought we were discussing the code created by our project members, and not code packaged by us. I agree the DJB packages may have some problems, but I think we came to the conclusion earlier that this was a borderline case. The M-Systems DoC driver license was unacceptable, and was never distributed from our SF site. Additional info: I believe the versions of PortSentry on our site are under the old license, and are alright. Please let me know if my belief is incorrect. http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/leaf/bin/packages/glibc-2.0/psentry.lrp -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
