Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
tor 2015-03-12 klockan 11:20 +0100 skrev Luc Verhaegen: After legal advice has been acquired, i will be happy to do the binary analysis, accounting for every hour, and Allwinner will then end up paying for my time. I can then get the cedrus guys a wide range of hw, and stick some cash in our linux-sunxi infrastructure. Everyone wins. Except allwinner. Probably Allwinner as well in the end.. Regards Henrik -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
tor 2015-03-12 klockan 12:41 + skrev Simon Kenyon: releasing a binary that removes GPL code does not discharge the obligation to release the source code for the infringing version you cannot unsteal something The world is not black or white. The above is a matter between the authors and distributors of the involved code where Allwinner is one part, not between you and me. Regards Henrik -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 06:29:50PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote: The only workable solution for Allwinner now is full support of the cedrus REing project, and using the code that comes from that, across the board. As was suggested on August 23rd last year, when i publically exposed the (L)GPL violation while also reaching out to allwinner in private conversation, about the much more volatile libvp62 illegal code. Nobody believes allwinner any more at this point. Luc Verhaegen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
Wow!! Search and Replace is not the same as coming clean from license violations! Do you really believe that one could do: a) Replace all strings, b) replace all function name and claim they're now good ? People are smarter than that! On Tuesday, March 10, 2015 at 11:32:28 AM UTC-5, Zhao Zhili wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, except some function names. This is a silly mistake, but maybe it's true. Does anybody know how to prove that? If the LGPL violations of libvdecoder.so can be cleaned up, how can we use the shared library on open source sunxi kernel, and even mainline kernel? I don't what's the low level part in the kernel that libvdecoder.so depends on, a thin VPU driver and some special memory management modules? If those parts can be solved, does the cedar + openmax + gstreamor openmax plugin workable? On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Luc Verhaegen li...@skynet.be javascript: wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 01:38:30PM +, Manuel Braga wrote: Hi, That was a joke mail, in response to the joke that allwinner gave us when allwinner added the LGPL license to source code that includes a binary accused of being in noncompliance. This was not a joke email. Its contents was very serious, and it should be interpreted as such. Allwinner needs/needed to know what it had just done, and that it has to fullfill its obligations. The fact that I did so, _after_ the facts had been often and openly discussed, and after allwinner had been explained their obligations countless times, does make it less than serious. The contents however is nothing to be laughed about. try to get the support of something like the SFC so that they can evaluate the merits of pursuing. And then the SFC would do the talking. I heared (but don't have the details), and this looks to be true. SFC or someone from SFC is aware of this issue. But maybe others can make this more clear. But nobody is here to sue, (why do i have to keep saying this) i think i can speak for all and say that we want to resolve this in a friendly way, but for that, there most be dialog between parties. Not excuse to ignore the issues. And Simos look at the news, with SFC and vmware, look at the time it took and no result. People tried talking to VMWare for 7-8 years. We have been trying to talk to Allwinner at least since 2012 (i am sure that LKCL would be happy to divulge his conversations with allwinner if it comes to legal action). Allwinners case is pretty open and shut, especially since they actively use both the kernel and uboot, and the symbols in cedar are clearly visible. And unlike VMWare Allwinner has its _whole_ business to lose. When there is any legal action, it could be a lot swifter. Perhaps Allwinner should act quickly and do so in an all encompassing way. If not, it stands to lose quite a lot. Luc Verhaegen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. The issue is that you *insinuate* that the claim (no relationship with FFmpeg) is false. What would be the next step to such a discussion? The one side claims no, the other yes, ad infinitum. For this to go forward, you or someone else needs to do this binary analysis. Once the binary analysis is done and you have something to show, you can reply with your data. In that way, such a discussion could potentially move forward. In terms of code of conduct documents, the idea is, when replying, to move a discussion forward. If a thread veers off, then change the Subject:, thus start a new thread. If you find any evidence of common binary code, you can present it respectfully and still it is going to be strong evidence (i.e. I did arm-linux-gnueabihf-objdump -d libvdecoder.so and the same to that other lib, and function xyz matches as shown here and here). Simos I was maintaining the ISL3893 project 10 years ago, where one of the vendor was sued in court in Germany for not giving out the sources: http://isl3893.sourceforge.net/ But that was on the action of copyright holders at the time (Harald Welte). -- Benjamin Henrion bhenrion at ffii.org FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or democratically elected legislators. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:25:19AM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. The issue is that you *insinuate* that the claim (no relationship with FFmpeg) is false. What would be the next step to such a discussion? The one side claims no, the other yes, ad infinitum. For this to go forward, you or someone else needs to do this binary analysis. Once the binary analysis is done and you have something to show, you can reply with your data. In that way, such a discussion could potentially move forward. I have done a full symbol analysis of libvecore as shipped on the cubieboard back in august. It clearly shows ffmpeg and libavcodec vs libvp62 and other questionable code whose origins are not clear. It's a txt file, but i should still toss it onto the wiki. I have done a brief nm of the newly LGPLed binary to find libavcodec and libvp62 symbols. I will happily spend a few hours and take that new library apart as i did the older one. I stated that i would do so last week, but i of course have not gotten to that yet. Having an allwinner employee state that that violating code has all been removed now, in this last... Week? That is just not credible. After legal advice has been acquired, i will be happy to do the binary analysis, accounting for every hour, and Allwinner will then end up paying for my time. I can then get the cedrus guys a wide range of hw, and stick some cash in our linux-sunxi infrastructure. Everyone wins. Except allwinner. In terms of code of conduct documents, the idea is, when replying, to move a discussion forward. If a thread veers off, then change the Subject:, thus start a new thread. If you find any evidence of common binary code, you can present it respectfully and still it is going to be strong evidence (i.e. I did arm-linux-gnueabihf-objdump -d libvdecoder.so and the same to that other lib, and function xyz matches as shown here and here). Again, if anyone who states anything that is supporting established and proven open source licenses, licenses which allwinner has been proven, without a doubt, to breach, you want to see them removed or at least silenced. How many people will be left in that ideal linux-sunxi community of yours, and how many of them will be able to usefully contribute code, documentation, or user help in your dystopia? Luc Verhaegen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, 12/3/15, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: [snip] communicate with Allwinner How? Where ARE Allwinner in this? If they're contactable WHERE IS THE SOURCE? I see a big, bad, unresponsive, uncaring company stealing other people's code and not obeying licences. Shame on Allwinner. If you Simos can change them please get on and do so. If not then I see no way in which you are helping. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On 03/12/15 12:12, Simos Xenitellis wrote: However, that analysis would refer to a prior version of the library. In this thread the discussion is about the March 2015 libvdecode.so/libvencode.so libraries. releasing a binary that removes GPL code does not discharge the obligation to release the source code for the infringing version you cannot unsteal something -- simon Simon Kenyon e: simoncken...@gmail.com m: +353 86 240 0005 l: http://ie.linkedin.com/pub/simon-kenyon/0/6b2/744/ s: simonckenyon t: @simonckenyon g: google.com/+SimonKenyon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
Hi, if someone want to make a binary analysis/reverse engineering of proprietary driver I would donate to the project. Is there some paypal accepting donations to this project? Or some donation box for the linux-sunxi project as well? Em quinta-feira, 12 de março de 2015 06:25:41 UTC-3, Simos Xenitellis escreveu: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos...@googlemail.com javascript: wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink want...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. The issue is that you *insinuate* that the claim (no relationship with FFmpeg) is false. What would be the next step to such a discussion? The one side claims no, the other yes, ad infinitum. For this to go forward, you or someone else needs to do this binary analysis. Once the binary analysis is done and you have something to show, you can reply with your data. In that way, such a discussion could potentially move forward. In terms of code of conduct documents, the idea is, when replying, to move a discussion forward. If a thread veers off, then change the Subject:, thus start a new thread. If you find any evidence of common binary code, you can present it respectfully and still it is going to be strong evidence (i.e. I did arm-linux-gnueabihf-objdump -d libvdecoder.so and the same to that other lib, and function xyz matches as shown here and here). Simos I was maintaining the ISL3893 project 10 years ago, where one of the vendor was sued in court in Germany for not giving out the sources: http://isl3893.sourceforge.net/ But that was on the action of copyright holders at the time (Harald Welte). -- Benjamin Henrion bhenrion at ffii.org FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or democratically elected legislators. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote: On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:25:19AM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. The issue is that you *insinuate* that the claim (no relationship with FFmpeg) is false. What would be the next step to such a discussion? The one side claims no, the other yes, ad infinitum. For this to go forward, you or someone else needs to do this binary analysis. Once the binary analysis is done and you have something to show, you can reply with your data. In that way, such a discussion could potentially move forward. I have done a full symbol analysis of libvecore as shipped on the cubieboard back in august. It clearly shows ffmpeg and libavcodec vs libvp62 and other questionable code whose origins are not clear. It's a txt file, but i should still toss it onto the wiki. If it is a big txt file, it should go to a pastebin and be linked from the Wiki. However, that analysis would refer to a prior version of the library. In this thread the discussion is about the March 2015 libvdecode.so/libvencode.so libraries. Moreover, Quink asked earlier a specific technical question. In terms of code of conduct, if there is no answer to that question, then the question would remain unanswered (for the time being). It's not good to hijack a question and instead another thread should be created. I have done a brief nm of the newly LGPLed binary to find libavcodec and libvp62 symbols. I will happily spend a few hours and take that new library apart as i did the older one. I stated that i would do so last week, but i of course have not gotten to that yet. Having an allwinner employee state that that violating code has all been removed now, in this last... Week? That is just not credible. After legal advice has been acquired, i will be happy to do the binary analysis, accounting for every hour, and Allwinner will then end up paying for my time. I can then get the cedrus guys a wide range of hw, and stick some cash in our linux-sunxi infrastructure. Everyone wins. Except allwinner. In terms of code of conduct documents, the idea is, when replying, to move a discussion forward. If a thread veers off, then change the Subject:, thus start a new thread. If you find any evidence of common binary code, you can present it respectfully and still it is going to be strong evidence (i.e. I did arm-linux-gnueabihf-objdump -d libvdecoder.so and the same to that other lib, and function xyz matches as shown here and here). Again, if anyone who states anything that is supporting established and proven open source licenses, licenses which allwinner has been proven, without a doubt, to breach, you want to see them removed or at least silenced. How many people will be left in that ideal linux-sunxi community of yours, and how many of them will be able to usefully contribute code, documentation, or user help in your dystopia? It is OK to express any relevant viewpoint, as long as it is done respectfully. What I see here, however, is extreme anger, the anger is expressed in the list, and it affects the people in the discussions. In addition, the important issue is how you see yourself in the community, in an aftermath of Luc is now fully satisfied with all licensing issues situation. Do you see yourself content to contribute and communicate with Allwinner for any future mainline efforts? My view is that the accumulating anger has taken its toll and there will be no happy after situation; the interest to contribute would have been exhausted. Simos -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, 12/3/15, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: [snip] The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg Even if true, Allwinner still must release previous versions of infringing code. WHERE IS THE SOURCE LOTS IS MISSING. Sorry for shouting but Allwinner are bad. It's in their hands to change. It's sad, indeed pathetic, to see anyone apologising for and trying to excuse/explain their bad behaviour. No apologies etc are needed, just the sources. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, except some function names. This is a silly mistake, but maybe it's true. Does anybody know how to prove that? If the LGPL violations of libvdecoder.so can be cleaned up, how can we use the shared library on open source sunxi kernel, and even mainline kernel? I don't what's the low level part in the kernel that libvdecoder.so depends on, a thin VPU driver and some special memory management modules? If those parts can be solved, does the cedar + openmax + gstreamor openmax plugin workable? On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 01:38:30PM +, Manuel Braga wrote: Hi, That was a joke mail, in response to the joke that allwinner gave us when allwinner added the LGPL license to source code that includes a binary accused of being in noncompliance. This was not a joke email. Its contents was very serious, and it should be interpreted as such. Allwinner needs/needed to know what it had just done, and that it has to fullfill its obligations. The fact that I did so, _after_ the facts had been often and openly discussed, and after allwinner had been explained their obligations countless times, does make it less than serious. The contents however is nothing to be laughed about. try to get the support of something like the SFC so that they can evaluate the merits of pursuing. And then the SFC would do the talking. I heared (but don't have the details), and this looks to be true. SFC or someone from SFC is aware of this issue. But maybe others can make this more clear. But nobody is here to sue, (why do i have to keep saying this) i think i can speak for all and say that we want to resolve this in a friendly way, but for that, there most be dialog between parties. Not excuse to ignore the issues. And Simos look at the news, with SFC and vmware, look at the time it took and no result. People tried talking to VMWare for 7-8 years. We have been trying to talk to Allwinner at least since 2012 (i am sure that LKCL would be happy to divulge his conversations with allwinner if it comes to legal action). Allwinners case is pretty open and shut, especially since they actively use both the kernel and uboot, and the symbols in cedar are clearly visible. And unlike VMWare Allwinner has its _whole_ business to lose. When there is any legal action, it could be a lot swifter. Perhaps Allwinner should act quickly and do so in an all encompassing way. If not, it stands to lose quite a lot. Luc Verhaegen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 01:34:18PM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). Simos Am i reading this right? Do you now wish to see Ben removed from the linux-sunxi community as well? So basically, everyone who wants established and proven open source licenses honoured, you would like to see them removed from linux-sunxi? Good luck with that. Luc Verhaegen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:32:25AM +0800, Quink wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, except some function names. This is a silly mistake, but maybe it's true. Does anybody know how to prove that? We've proven extensively that Allwinner breached not only ffmpeg/libavcodec licensing, it also used illegal code, and given that wide a span of very foul license violations, nobody can trust allwinner any more when it claims that it now has clean hands. Allwinner should not be asking linux-sunxi.org for advice on how to prove that their hands are clean today. They should have a small army of lawyers at the ready this point. These lawyers should be well versed in international copyright and IP matters, and also have a good grasp of the english language. If the LGPL violations of libvdecoder.so can be cleaned up, how can we use the shared library on open source sunxi kernel, and even mainline kernel? I don't what's the low level part in the kernel that libvdecoder.so depends on, a thin VPU driver and some special memory management modules? If those parts can be solved, does the cedar + openmax + gstreamor openmax plugin workable? The only workable solution for Allwinner now is full support of the cedrus REing project, and using the code that comes from that, across the board. Any solution which has allwinner using any binary is now suspicious and allwinner will not be able to satisfactorilly prove the origins of such code or the fact that no licenses or other things are breached this time round. Plus, some well known REers probably need to go waste a lot of time on said binaries, and this time will in the end be billed to Allwinner. So Allwinner should give up on any strategy that involves binaries. Now. And have some chance of seeing this resolved amicably. Luc Verhaegen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On 11 Mar 2015 19:03, Henrik Nordström hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote: ons 2015-03-11 klockan 08:39 +0100 skrev Benjamin Henrion: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Which was one of my concerns back at the start of this saga. If the author of the LGPL code the binary is claimed to infringe on says it does not then there is no case. That doesn't mean we can't do the analysis for them. Thanks, Julian Calaby -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). Simos -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
ons 2015-03-11 klockan 08:39 +0100 skrev Benjamin Henrion: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. If the author of the LGPL code the binary is claimed to infringe on says it does not then there is no case. Regards Henrik -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
Hi Simos, On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). Are you referring to Ben's short reply or are you implying that Allwinner follows that code? If it's the former, he probably could have better articulated his comments, if it's the latter, then I believe that not violating the (L)GPL would be considered a violation of that code. Either way, I'll rephrase his comment: In my experience, from what I've seen when other projects have had to deal with license violations, the company accused of violating the license will expend the smallest amount of time and effort required to deal with the accusations. In general, when binary files containing strings referring to some project that is licensed in a manner requiring the release of source code have been released without source code, companies generally fix the situation by removing or replacing the strings instead of rewriting the component or releasing the source code. Or to put it another way, I highly doubt that Allwinner's programmers have rewritten the code they were using from ffmpeg in a non-license-violating manner that quickly. Given Allwinner's previous behaviour (embedding LGPL code in closed source binaries), I highly doubt that anyone here will be satisfied with any solution Allwinner produces that isn't the release of the complete source code licensed under an applicable license. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.cal...@gmail.com Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. I was maintaining the ISL3893 project 10 years ago, where one of the vendor was sued in court in Germany for not giving out the sources: http://isl3893.sourceforge.net/ But that was on the action of copyright holders at the time (Harald Welte). -- Benjamin Henrion bhenrion at ffii.org FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or democratically elected legislators. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
Dear S.J.R., Thanks for taking the time to reply in detail. Perhaps you are right about linux-exynos. No, actually I accept you are right. In a war of attrition, it's bound to get to such results. On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 2:47 PM, S.J.R. van Schaik step...@synkhronix.com wrote: Concerning the linux-sunxi wiki, if you want to get somewhere, then first of all stop throwing a bunch of argumenta ad hominem into an e-mail to a public mailing list. It simply won't get you anywhere. Rather than editing the wiki as you see fit, it is usually better to address the issues of the wiki, propose some changes and talk about your proposal with active members of the community, such as Luc. I am quite sure that if you do this properly, that you can reach a point of consensus in that regard. Community building is not about blaming one single person within a community, it is a matter of working as a community, talking to each other, and trying to get somewhere. It's great to work with consensus. If everyone plays nice and you are happy to apologize if something goes wrong, is perfect for the ideal community. For the case of the sunxi wiki, I would like to ask you whether there was a discussion or a consensus when parts about GPL violations were added to several places. In addition, the text around the GPL violations was far from neutral, which Also, the main page of the wiki features the text Allwinner does not actively participate in or support this community. In fact, it is violating the GPLv2 license in several ways and has so far not shown willingness to resolve this. That's a big statement to make. The http://linux-sunxi.org/Talk:Main_Page does not mention any relevant discussion for that statement. Finally, if you don't like how someone is reacting to you, then remember that it is hard to read someone's feelings from an e-mail, and that you can always change your own approach to get a different reaction. In the worst case you have to let it rest for a while, instead of adding more fuel to the blazing fire. That way you also get yourself some time to think about it. I think the current situation is that of a stalemate. This fire has been burning for more than six months, with no attempts of an intervention. I do not think it is something that will be forgotten or attitudes will change. I think I can read the feelings from an e-mail, and get a good picture from several emails. By reading the mail titled Formal request for source code for LGPL licensed software, I can see that the text is very hard to read. The text makes sense to the writer but it's the reader who is important. If those previous e-mails were written in the same way, I can fully understand why they were ineffective. Getting no result from those requests to resolve violations, is frustrating. And it's frustrating enough that it becomes emotional, and it was has led to the current situation. Personally I would help a friend of mine not to get stuck in such a situation. A more proactive attitude would be to get to a statement like 1. any license violation to free/opensource software is unacceptable 2. there are cases of avoidable violations. What do we do there? Select a direction and follow it. 3. pursuing GPL violations on the linux-sunxi mailing list is unacceptable. If you have a case, then sue (the right target). As others mentioned (and their message was drown out), try to get the support of something like the SFC so that they can evaluate the merits of pursuing. And then the SFC would do the talking. All the best, Simos -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 01:38:30PM +, Manuel Braga wrote: Hi, That was a joke mail, in response to the joke that allwinner gave us when allwinner added the LGPL license to source code that includes a binary accused of being in noncompliance. This was not a joke email. Its contents was very serious, and it should be interpreted as such. Allwinner needs/needed to know what it had just done, and that it has to fullfill its obligations. The fact that I did so, _after_ the facts had been often and openly discussed, and after allwinner had been explained their obligations countless times, does make it less than serious. The contents however is nothing to be laughed about. try to get the support of something like the SFC so that they can evaluate the merits of pursuing. And then the SFC would do the talking. I heared (but don't have the details), and this looks to be true. SFC or someone from SFC is aware of this issue. But maybe others can make this more clear. But nobody is here to sue, (why do i have to keep saying this) i think i can speak for all and say that we want to resolve this in a friendly way, but for that, there most be dialog between parties. Not excuse to ignore the issues. And Simos look at the news, with SFC and vmware, look at the time it took and no result. People tried talking to VMWare for 7-8 years. We have been trying to talk to Allwinner at least since 2012 (i am sure that LKCL would be happy to divulge his conversations with allwinner if it comes to legal action). Allwinners case is pretty open and shut, especially since they actively use both the kernel and uboot, and the symbols in cedar are clearly visible. And unlike VMWare Allwinner has its _whole_ business to lose. When there is any legal action, it could be a lot swifter. Perhaps Allwinner should act quickly and do so in an all encompassing way. If not, it stands to lose quite a lot. Luc Verhaegen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
*sigh* I have been reading this mailing list for a while and every time somebody starts an argument with luc it´s like watching a plane crash. - You know exactly what is going to happen, actually you don´t like to watch it, but you are too captivated to look the other way and in the end it is going to be messy and people might get lost - Everybody claims to know how to build a community, but cannot stand that the other has a different way of doing things. Can we all be friends again, behave like adults and go back to work? :-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
Dear Simos, I noticed in your recent blog post that you are starting linux-exynos.org. - Simos Xenitellis. Since you are starting linux-exynos.org, you need to learn this new thing. - Simos Xenitellis. I am one of the two people who has worked on setting up linux-exynos.org for the past year as a response to Luc's talk at FOSDEM 2014. At that talk Luc explained that what sets Allwinner SoCs apart from other SoCs is its community, which other SoCs, such as the Samsung Exynos, clearly lacked at that time. For example, the instructions for installing Linux on the Chromebooks were all scattered around the world-wide web on the Chromium website, several blog posts, several forum threads, etc. What also happened at that talk is that my friend Merlijn Wizzup Wajer asked for some pointers on setting up a community for it, which Luc explained thoroughly. Let me get these facts straight for you, as it seems that you are implying that Luc is shifting towards linux-exynos: - Luc does have an account on our wiki, but hasn't contributed anything. I am not necessarily expecting him to do that either, because it is likely that he already has his hands full with the linux-sunxi community. [1] - Luc is present on both #linux-exynos and #linux-sunxi. - Luc has never replied to any of the mails on the linux-exynos mailing lists, as none of them are relevant to him, I'd presume. Then we have Luc's blog post [2], of which the last section, and only the last section, explains that, as a graphics driver developer, he has to work with various SoCs, which other than sharing the same GPU, are very different. For linux-sunxi one of the frustrating parts is the display driver, and for linux-exynos one of the frustrating parts is the broken KMS driver. Again Luc clearly indicates that linux-sunxi was the only active community at that time, and that that was what other SoCs clearly lacked. He also states that even though he has been working a lot on the linux-sunxi community, he does not want to do this for other communities as he does not have the time for that. Rightfully so, I'd say. Then this last section continues with the story I started this e-mail with, and the rest is simply a call to help us, if you can and want to, of course. Concerning the linux-sunxi wiki, if you want to get somewhere, then first of all stop throwing a bunch of argumenta ad hominem into an e-mail to a public mailing list. It simply won't get you anywhere. Rather than editing the wiki as you see fit, it is usually better to address the issues of the wiki, propose some changes and talk about your proposal with active members of the community, such as Luc. I am quite sure that if you do this properly, that you can reach a point of consensus in that regard. Community building is not about blaming one single person within a community, it is a matter of working as a community, talking to each other, and trying to get somewhere. Finally, if you don't like how someone is reacting to you, then remember that it is hard to read someone's feelings from an e-mail, and that you can always change your own approach to get a different reaction. In the worst case you have to let it rest for a while, instead of adding more fuel to the blazing fire. That way you also get yourself some time to think about it. Yours faithfully, S.J.R. van Schaik. 1. http://linux-exynos.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Libv 2. http://libv.livejournal.com/27388.html -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 3:30 AM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote: On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 02:13:48AM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote: On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 02:31:41PM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: Simos, I am corrosive and bitter, but perhaps i am not the toxic one here. Luc, Hi. You are not a bad person. We first met at XDS2008, so I have somewhat first-hand experience. We even had lunch/dinner at the pub and you behaved as a normal human being to the waiter; I do not think there was trimmed pubic hair in the haggis we all ate. I have no recollection of this, or what you mean by the above. There were some movie references in there but nevermind. You really try to make good things and help the projects that you are active in. However, in this thing called community building, it's not your cup of tea. While you believe that it is your cup of tea, par excellence, right? I say that community building is something you are bad at it, and you return it back. Since you are starting linux-exynos.org, you need to learn this new thing. You try to insult new contributors into doing NewDevice pages on the Wiki but you end up sending them away. The worst part is that others in the list can see the mess and will not touch the wiki either. Also, edit-war with new contributors? At one point there was the accidental GPL compliance. Today it is the mainline effort, the new device howto (and related howtos) and the number of documented devices that puts sunxi seriously apart from other soc projects. The NewDeviceHowto needs to be simplified. As it, it makes sense to *you*, but it is too complicated for the new user. The skill you are missing is that of reading a document in the eyes of another person. Feel free to show _all_ the instances that an edit war has happened, i will be happy to explain the backgrounds of them (if you can even find multiple), and how useful those people have been or would have been. You mention the svn guys toxic talk below, i will refer to that extensively in my reply. You are happy to explain the background. Wearing the hat of the community builder, you DO NOT antagonize new prospective contributors. And especially, since it's not the area of your expertise, you delegate to some other member of the community that is happy to assist. You need these in any community you are making. The solution here is to get others to help out and you do *not* get involved. You might want to watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q52kFL8zVoM which discusses the subtleties of community building. I was wondering when you were going to bring that one up. Watch it again, and take particular notice of how it talks about documentation and actual contributions. We might need to watch together, because the message is about poisonous people and how they damage communities. All we ever see you do is trash me. You have written no code, you have not contributed to the wiki, you only now spend some time on irc to try to clean up your image. That's an attempt to divert the discussion to me in person. I am not the story. Should I remind you that this started out as me pointing out Allwinners role in the blatant LGPL violation that is cedarx, and I wasn't the one to go for a personal attack? If there is violation, it's simple to comply by the LGPL and we will be none the wiser. Big companies pay lots of money so they comply to the letter. Like in the TVs and other consumer products as in http://opensource.samsung.com/ The Linux kernel by itself is useless. The only importance of those code dumps is to find out which libraries do not have a usable BSD alternative. Unlike what you claim above, I actually contributed. If you really want to go through this avenue: if I prove you wrong, you back off entirely from all this. In comparison to the noise you are making, and how you like to portray yourself, you have contributed surprisingly little. So, from having no contribution, I have little contribution. You started calling for banishing me, while trying to instigate a fork, almost as soon as you got here. And you try to post about every little positive thing that allwinner does (while allwinner ignores its hard legal responsibilities), to try to take credit for them and to try artificially gain any form of standing here. Personally I cannot think of a way to gain something here. Gain reputation among you all? I respect all of you, but no. Really? Really. In your case, you have things to lose from this community. You have invested in this project. You have invested so much that you would be even a suitable recruit for Allwinner. Even having access to internal documents and source in order to produce a proper libvdpau. But sadly, you come off as a loose cannon. It's scary. It does not appear that you have a flexible strategy. In fact it's so
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
Hi, On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 02:13:48 +0200 Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: In your case, you have things to lose from this community. You have invested in this project. You have invested so much that you would be even a suitable recruit for Allwinner. Even having access to internal documents and source in order to produce a proper libvdpau. Maybe i am wrong, but this form of speaking makes me beleave that you are associating Luc to the video engine work. And this is incorrect, he has nothing to do with it. If you or someone else is not happy with the work done, then it is *me* the one to go complain. Also the proper thing needed is a proper mainlined kernel driver for this video engine, but appears that i am almost exclusive the only one speaking this need. See, this is the page http://linux-sunxi.org/VE_Planning, but in this conditions (well i thought that linux-sunxi was a community), there is no desire to spend the time nor motivation to continue. And to make clear is not because fault of documentation, we have already all that is need more that 1 and half year. But what i see is only talking about binaries, and that is not my business. -- Manuel Braga -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, 2015-03-05 at 12:12 +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 3:30 AM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote: On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 02:13:48AM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote: On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 02:31:41PM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: Simos, Simos, please stop it. And you failed to respond to Luc's points. PS. Mediatek developers are contributing to mainline kernel. Päikest, Priit Laes -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
