Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Karthik Kumar]

On Jan 6, 2008 4:25 AM, Gilles Chehade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 01:42:16AM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > > Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not
> > > allow them to be redistributed with the system.
> > >
> >
> > You are talking of free as in freedom and not price, right? If the
> > whole point was to avoid paying $$$ in OpenBSD, my bad.
> >
>
> What has money to do with this ?
> You sound like you have issues understanding, so I will make it as simple
> as I can, please take the time to read a few times, and make sure you get
> it, before replying to this mail:
>
> - vendor A sells hardware that requires a firmware
>
> - OpenBSD wants to support that hardware and needs the firmware
> to be shipped, say in /etc/firmware/, to have the
> hardware work out of the box
>
> - vendor A says "if a customer wants the firmware, he must go
> to out website and fill a registration form online".
>
> - OpenBSD does not ship the firmware because it is not free
> enough.
>
> See ? This is an example, it is unrelated to money, and you still failed
> to show us ONE point where we don't stick to our goals.
>

So registration form = non-free. You failed to prove how it was not
free. I asked if it required OpenBSD to pay money to a vendor, or the
issue was about something else besides the money. I don't see the
registration form being a problem here. Maybe they might simply take
down your name and address for contact details or whatever. I don't
see why a registration form must be non-free here.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Karthik Kumar]

> There is no such thing as free as in beer.  This is one of the dumbest
> analogies I have ever heard.  Who came up with it anyway?  Was it the
> FSF by any chance?
>

A guy called it 'Free as in Sex' here. Blame him for the next dumbest term. :P

> >
> > > By now if you have been carefully studying you should have learned
> > > that OpenBSD ans OpenSolaris are as far as east is from the west when
> > > it comes to freedom?
> > >
> >
> > All I see is a set of groups spreading propaganda in their own
> > interests. I take no sides. :-)
>
> Wrong.  One spreads propaganda and accuses the other of bs.  The other
> calls the bs out and proves conclusively that there is (let me use a FSF
> word here) FUD.  Your arguments are stupid and you have been told
> repeatedly so.  Don't like it?  stop replying.  I will continue to point
> out that your arguments are a fallacy.
>

I can keep arguing. Too bad the list has to take all this.

>
> You sound like him.
>

See, i'm not going to play your silly game.

>
> And you have been told by many that your opinion has no bearing.
> Repeating it won't make it so.
>

You're replying to it. Stop replying if it doesn't have a bearing.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Siju George]

On Jan 5, 2008 11:51 PM, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated
> > at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read.
> >
>
> I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you
> like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written in
> a stupid web page until you live up to them.
>

Karthik, My Friend, You are becoming too stupid and childish because
you keep whining that OpenBSD does not live up the goals stated on
their websites.

Please point out specific instances like

1) ...
2) 
3) 

ok?

Otherwise you just sound silly!!!
And again you forgot to cc RMS, I have added him.
I hope your firmware confusion was over with the explanation given in
a mail up in this thread.

If only you will study how much OpenBSD project has contributed to
freeing up documentation for writing free drivers that let you use
free systems ( since you claim you use it ) you would drop your silly
generalization and vague accusations.

If you want to reply any more to this thread please shoe specific
instances where OpenBSD has deviated from its goals. Some body
competent enough can always answer you and clear your confusion. may
be the competition person will be busy coding and might not even read
your mail.

But from your part be serious and state clearly where the deviation
has taken place

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Karthik Kumar]

On Jan 6, 2008 1:22 AM, Jacob Grydholt Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 05/01/2008, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify "to encourage
> > people to use
> > non-free software", but I see that happening anyway.
>
> And so what? I think you were trying to prove that OpenBSD were not
> living up to their goals. Instead you are repeating what RMS started
> out with. Try actually showing us one of OpenBSD's goals that the
> project is not following.
>
> > Your own claims?
> >
> > 1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe
> > flash player vulnerabilities.
>
> What are you on about? As people have tried to explain again and
> again, OpenBSD does not ship with adobe flash player. Did you
> understand the "Secure by Default" mode?
>

Secure by default. Ship with nothing and call it secure. Wow! Maybe it
shouldn't start the network by default, huh? Then that's secure, isn't
it? Start no daemons, start no shells: ZOMG!!! it's secure :P

OpenBSD got pwned a year ago with another remote hole. I hope they
find enough so they can stop bragging about 'Secure by default'.

Do you realize that many people just can not live with 'default'?
Look: people do "use" OpenBSD for things other than plain old fvwm
with xterm. And keeping security as a goal is not just for a stupid
dubious marketing campaign.

>
> Jacob Grydholt
>
>



-- 
Karthik
http://guilt.bafsoft.net

Re: delete deleted data

[Eric Furman]

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 14:25:37 +1100, "Sunnz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> 2008/1/5, Jon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > rm -P wont work... I looking to clean up deleted data ... not securely
> > delete a file.
> >
> >
> 
> Just create a file and filling it with /dev/zero until it takes up all
> the free spaces, then rm -P that file.

But from his original post he wants to make sure everything is cleanly
deleted without affecting the existing OS. In this case I don't think
what you are trying to do is possible, but it also depends on how
securely you are trying to make your deletes. Do you want to hide
it from the schmo you are taking in to service your computer or are
you trying to hide it from the FBI?

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Jacob Meuser]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:39:35PM -0600, Duncan Patton a Campbell wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 17:28:39 -0800 (PST)
> Reid Nichol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Well OpenBSD is fine here.  But, are you sure about RMS?  Because he
> > has been contradicting himself all over the place in this thread alone.
> 
> Richard appears to be falling into a "single point of failure" setup.  
> Its like the "Drug Czar" concept where a single man is given enormous
> powers and his individual weaknessess, however small and insignificant, 
> become a mechanism for prying open the whole system.

not the same at all.  RMS is not an appointed figurehead.  he is the
founder of the system he represents.

the only setup is Richard's own inability to be convincingly accurate
and consistent.  that is neither small nor insignificant.

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Theo de Raadt]

> On 1/5/08, Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Does ReactOS recommend non-free software?
> > If so. please show me what it says, and the URL.
> 
> I have a better idea.  Why don't you do your own fucking homework.

Oh come now.  You can't expect a hypocrite to do homework that
undermines himself, can you?

Straw men etc.

[visc]

This really is getting old... it's getting harder to want to even go
through new messages in [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I'm not siding with RMS or anybody, but let's either make a new
mailing list for it or let this stuff get archived and move on.

Just my 2"

Re: Advice requested on security issues

[Douglas A. Tutty]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:48:53PM -0800, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On 1/5/08, Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is there anything that, bug-wise, could go wrong with that remote
> > browser that would be able to read or alter anything on the local
> > machine?  I'm talking about using ssh's X forwarding features, not using
> > X's native forwarding.
> 
> a lot more can go wrong than can go right.  in theory, yes, you are
> insulated from the client acting up.  in practice, the isolation is
> often too complete.  i have never had an app actually work via an ssh
> -X connection.

I do it all the time.  The __only__ "normal app" I can't get to work is
from an OpenBSD box, ssh -X to a Debian box running Iceweasel (Firefox).
Debian-Debian even Iceweasel works just fine.

The reason I do it is my main box is in the basement and has lots of
power and memory.  My remote box is upstairs and is a P-II.  Its hard to
run a current Firefox on a P-II with 64 MB of ram.  The KDE apps
(Konqueror, Kpdf) work well also.

The other type of app I can't run is VLC.  I guess it gets confused
trying to acceess a hardware display (even if all I want to do is play a
cd).  No biggie, I just tried to see if it would work.

Doug.

Re: Richard Stallman...

[L]

Lars NoodC)n wrote:

L wrote:
  

...
The first time I heard cult mentioned was when people were complaining
about open bsd being a cult of open bsd followers, or mean rude cult
members...



I assume you are talking about this dreadful thread.

  

...

Outside this thread the first time I heard cults mentioned was back in
the late 1990's in the context of the M$ boosters.


-Lars


  
Sorry.. yes I meant the first time I heard the 'cult' mentioned relating 
to openbsd...


The first time outside this thread I heard of the word cult was when I 
was in Religion class in school. I didn't like religion class... but I 
have to admit the warnings they gave me about cults in religion class 
were very helpful... because it is coming in handy when I study GNU. It 
was hilarious in class to watch videos of what type of cults were out 
there.. but now that I look at GNU I laugh every time I see it.


By the way.. you stole my name!
That's why I have 505 tacked on to the end.. so people can differentiate 
me from all the fraudulent Lars' out there like yourself!


Regards,
Lars (L505)

Re: Richard Stallman...

[L]

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:


BTW, one would say that the accusations of "cult" did not start from me
(or Richard), so I'd say you "accusers" fall straight on the "above all"
that's included in that link:

 "We are not a cult -- all of those other groups are. We work very hard
to make sure that our group doesn't turn into a cult like them."

Rui
  


The first time I heard cult mentioned was when people were complaining 
about open bsd being a cult of open bsd followers, or mean rude cult 
members.



Found it... Several instances of GNU followers accusing OpenBSD as a cult:

"If everyone on the planet outside your own *cult* calls you an ass, you 
are either the messiah or an ass. My money is on the latter."


"Outside the *cult* of OpenBSD no one else sees it that way."


http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2007/12/14/507176


This was also the same thread where a GNU follower claimed that a 
hilarious "did you?" question was an insult. The same hypocrite went on 
to insult the person who asked the hilarious "did you" question. The 
person accusing a person of insult, was an insulter himself.. hence the 
hypocrisy and irony.


Irony and hypocrisy are actually closely related. Take note!

L505

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Lars Noodén]

L wrote:
> ...
> The first time I heard cult mentioned was when people were complaining
> about open bsd being a cult of open bsd followers, or mean rude cult
> members...

I assume you are talking about this dreadful thread.

Outside this thread the first time I heard cults mentioned was back in
the late 1990's in the context of the M$ boosters.

+ outside the mainstream - yep, especially in the 90's
+ novel belief system - yep, making bad engineering acceptable
+ perceived benefits to members - yep, better products
consistently avoided
+ headed by single "charismatic" leader - yep, though it's taken

years of whitewashing full time by several PR
firms to dress up an arrogant, condescending,   
impatient, know-nothing, rich nerd into
the cult figure the press paints for us
+ isolationism - yep, the embrace, extend and extinguish
strategy
to defeat standards does succeed in
cutting off the world.
+ dangerous and deceptive practices - yep, perjury, false
advertising, the works

etc.

If you look at all the bizarre politics affecting use of technology
going on at the state and national levels (US and EU) in regards to not
applying rules of commerce or engineering to just that one "company", it
fits well with how cults operate.  MSFTers definitely operate quite far
outside a fact-based universe.

When dealing with technology, facts are more important than marketing dogma.

Of the BSD's, OpenBSD and NetBSD seem the most focused on nice, dry
technical material.  OpenBSD has the further advantage of taking extra
precautions with supplementals tools such as licenses.

-Lars

Re: Advice requested on security issues

[johan beisser]

On Jan 5, 2008, at 7:48 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:


On 1/5/08, Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Is there anything that, bug-wise, could go wrong with that remote
browser that would be able to read or alter anything on the local
machine?  I'm talking about using ssh's X forwarding features, not  
using

X's native forwarding.


a lot more can go wrong than can go right.  in theory, yes, you are
insulated from the client acting up.  in practice, the isolation is
often too complete.  i have never had an app actually work via an ssh
-X connection.


Haven't used it in ages, but I've yet to have one not work. "Back in  
the day" I used to forward my Netscape session over it to keep my  
browsing private from my then boss' bad habits of sniffing. It  
wouldn't stop someone from watching the Xsession, but it would keep  
them off of my browser itself.


But, pretty much everything worked, outside of audio.

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Marco Peereboom]

Let me make a sincere apology to all who read that and thought I was
drawing a parallel.  It obviously was poor choice of words and I am
sorry for saying it.  I won't even try to explain what my actual
intention was since it'll sound hollow.

Bad marco.

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:10PM -0500, Deanna Phillips wrote:
> Marco Peereboom writes:
> 
> > Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt.  Do I need to mail you
> > some maxi pads?
> 
> Do I need to point out that you've attempted to insult someone
> by comparing him to some bullshit stereotype about women?

Re: Advice requested on security issues

[Ted Unangst]

On 1/5/08, Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there anything that, bug-wise, could go wrong with that remote
> browser that would be able to read or alter anything on the local
> machine?  I'm talking about using ssh's X forwarding features, not using
> X's native forwarding.

a lot more can go wrong than can go right.  in theory, yes, you are
insulated from the client acting up.  in practice, the isolation is
often too complete.  i have never had an app actually work via an ssh
-X connection.

Re: Richard Stallwoman...

[L]

Deanna Phillips wrote:
Marco Peereboom writes: 
  

Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt.  Do I need to mail you
some maxi pads?


Do I need to point out that you've attempted to insult someone
by comparing him to some bullshit stereotype about women?
  
Here is my stereotype: Sharp 200Watt with 10 inch sub woofer under my 
desk near my feet.


Modern operating systems (one being OpenBSD) are designed to multi task, 
just like a woman.
Women are superior to men. Women are also software, and are much nicer 
to hug.


Sorry, just the facts.
L505

Re: Richard Stallman...

[L]

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 06:18:34PM -0700, L wrote:
  

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:


On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:31:00AM -0700, L wrote:
  
  
Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see 
it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about 
EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong.



You seem to abuse the word hypocrisy. None of the definitions I find in
any dictionary fir your accusations.

As such, I can't take your definition or accusations of "cults"
seriously, as you seem to be quite an angry convict of some sort of cult
too.

Rui 
  

http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q8.html

"*81 . 
Hypocrisy*


Cult members, including the leader, project their own sins and crimes onto 
people outside of the cult:"



I don't take that as a definition of hypocrisy, but as a list of the
hypocrisies commonly found in cults.

  
I can't take stallmans free software as the definition of free 
software... but rather a list of philosophies that are according to 
stallman.. on what software should be.. therefore stallmanism rather 
than free software.

BTW, one would say that the accusations of "cult" did not start from me
(or Richard), so I'd say you "accusers" fall straight on the "above all"
that's included in that link:

 "We are not a cult -- all of those other groups are. We work very hard
to make sure that our group doesn't turn into a cult like them."

Rui

  


The first time I heard cult mentioned was when people were complaining 
about open bsd being a cult of open bsd followers, or mean rude cult 
members.


I turned the tables and called GNU/FSF a cult later on, weeks later.

I can find the archives for this... and many OpenBSD people and third 
party people could find evidence showing OpenBSD was called a cult way 
long ago... But we'll/I'll never convince anything to you since we just 
keep going back and forth.. trolling. The only difference is that one 
person is trolling truth, and other person is trolling denial of truth. 
Both trolls are wasting bandwidth.. some trolls are truer than others.


As I said.. if you manage to become unbrainwashed.. you will thank me 
for my therapy. Until then you are forgiven.


If you think I am part of a cult.. prove it...
I've given lots of evidence of GNU being a cult... all the descriptions 
on the pages fit very well.


Me? I work a software company.. I work on many operating systems... 
OpenBSD, Freebsd, ,Windows, Fedora, debian.  I am not focused on 'one 
true way' like a cult is focused... I do not donate all my code to a 
foundation who keeps my code under their reign... and I do not lock away 
my code to a figurehead...


The one advantage of the GNU cult is that you can escape the cult by 
just deciding not to participate in GNU any more. But that is true with 
any cult.. there are ways to get out of any cult if you try and find a 
way. It may be difficult in some cases to get out of the cult.. but just 
because you can escape the cult doesn't make it not a cult. i.e. one 
cannot argue GNU is not a cult since GNU doesn't force you to 
participate. no, cults can still be cults even if not forced.


Also, try the sense of humor too. It can get you out of stressful 
situations. I still love you Rui.

I'm the guy who invented the phrase "unconditional developer love".

L505

Re: Advice requested on security issues

[Douglas A. Tutty]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 10:43:56PM +0200, Jussi Peltola wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:36:04AM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> > Perhaps you could use the banking machine as your main access point,
> > running apps on the main box via ssh.  Would that introduce any
> > insecurity in the banking machine?
> I certainly wouldn't do sensitive things on an X server with untrusted
> clients. What makes you think a remote X client is any less dangerous
> than a local one?
> 

The remote X client (e.g. a browser) would be running on a box that
didn't contain exceedingly confidential info, however lets say it was
running OpenBSD, and therefore OpenBSD's OpenSSH and Xorg.  The local
box would also run OpenBSD and would have on its filesystem all the
confidential information.  The only connection between the two would be
the ssh link.  

Is there anything that, bug-wise, could go wrong with that remote
browser that would be able to read or alter anything on the local
machine?  I'm talking about using ssh's X forwarding features, not using
X's native forwarding.

For banking, use a browser on the local machine directly.

Doug.

Re: OT YAG Re: delete deleted data

[Douglas A. Tutty]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 12:09:08PM -0700, Diana Eichert wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Jan 2008, Shane J Pearson wrote:
> SNIP
> >Where a mix of humans, transistors, valves, gears and three-phase 
> >motors/sensors, got the job done.;-)
> >
> >Shane
> 
> No coal and steam?
> 
> I had to say it.

What do you think generates the three-phase power on a ship at sea;
extension cord to the dock?  :)

I wonder what media they use for data asternment?  

I hear that U.S. Navy S.E.a.L.'s use Flash(-Bang)s. :)

Doug.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Reid Nichol]

--- Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you
> like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written
> in a stupid web page until you live up to them.

Which OpenBSD does.  You have failed to show otherwise.


> > We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow
> someone to
> > install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the
> system
> > and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against
> goals,
> > which you do not want to read.
> >
> 
> I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify "to encourage
> people to use non-free software", but I see that happening anyway.

Where?  Are you refering to the FAQ?  Are you aware of what FAQ means?


> I am not uninformed. What makes you say that? You, sir are biased
> towards OpenBSD and you can say what you want but it doesn't make
> your version of the truth any better.

It is the truth though.  But, I'll mention that what you just said
doesn't make your delusion true.


best regards,
Reid Nichol

President Bush says:

War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength


  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Duncan Patton a Campbell]

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 17:28:39 -0800 (PST)
Reid Nichol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Well OpenBSD is fine here.  But, are you sure about RMS?  Because he
> has been contradicting himself all over the place in this thread alone.

Richard appears to be falling into a "single point of failure" setup.  
Its like the "Drug Czar" concept where a single man is given enormous
powers and his individual weaknessess, however small and insignificant, 
become a mechanism for prying open the whole system.

Dhu

Re: A clue about php5, please?

[STeve Andre']

On Wednesday 02 January 2008 00:29:11 Chris Kuethe wrote:
> php.ini ... short tags

I have no idea why my first post thanking folks didn't get
through,  but thanks to all for the data.  Most appreciated.

STeve Andre'

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Reid Nichol]

--- Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Jan 6, 2008 1:06 AM, Reid Nichol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > --- Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Use of non-free software is highly harmful to your
> > > computer and ethics.
> >
> > Please cite a piece of software that can harm my computer merely
> > because it is "non-free" in the FSF/GNU sense.  And you should
> probably
> > qualify that ethics remark with: Should you be an extremist of
> sorts...
> >
> >
> 
> How about nvidia proprietary drivers on OpenBSD?

Unless I'm mistaken, these don't exist.  Of course, if I'm wrong,
you'll be able to provide documentation that they do.  I won't hold my
breath though.


> Should you be an extremist of sorts, you should put it in the ports
> tree and call it "free".

I'm certain that there was some inner dialogue going on while you wrote
this that you're not letting me in on.  Because, I have no idea what
you're talking about here.


> > > On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of
> > > non-free software must come clean first: No clean, no talk.
> >
> > Sophistry.  If there is problems in logic, etc then one need not be
> of
> > a certain type (with respect to what you're saying) to realize that
> nor
> > point it out.  To say so is asinine (above as well).
> >
> 
> No, it isn't. If you're simply preaching to the world that you're
> free, it only makes you political. And that includes you, OpenBSD.

Well OpenBSD is fine here.  But, are you sure about RMS?  Because he
has been contradicting himself all over the place in this thread alone.
 Not to mention his actions, both past and present everywhere.  But, in
his mind (and I imagine yours) it's probably easy to not see this when
what you believe/preach changes from second to second to avoid any
criticism that comes "your" way.

But, I'll also mention that you didn't actually comment on what I
wrote.  You commented on something you made up.  Please read what I
wrote and comment on that should you reply again.



best regards,
Reid Nichol

President Bush says:

War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength


  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:46:08PM -0500, Eliah Kagan wrote:
> When you say the world is not made of such extremes, do you mean you
> think the long-term effects of something are always unquantifiable?

The long term effects of anything are always something left to optimism
or pessimism, according to each PoV, short of mathmatical formulas.

> That these specifically are unquantifiable? Indeed, if you could be
> more clear, that would be helpful.

I think they're unquantifyable.

> Suppose someone is unable to use Wine to run a proprietary program on
> a free operating system. As a result, they never use the free
> operating system. So they never use all the free programs that are
> part of that operating system. Well most of those programs fulfill a
> function that is also fulfilled (or sought to be fulfilled) by
> proprietary programs. So by enabling them to use their proprietary
> program in conjunction with a free operating system, they are also
> using many free alternatives to many other proprietary programs. This
> seems to promote development of software that replaces proprietary
> programs.

People seldom evolute in harsh steps. Before I learned of free software,
I only thought GNU/Linux as useful for college. Windows was invaluable
for the games.

After some time I noticed I didn't have enough space for my 
music collection and I hadn't booted on Windows for months in a row...
never again. This was... about ten years ago... give or take an year.

Never went back.

> There are also quite a few free programs that run only on Windows.
> (Being able to redistribute a program and its source and modify and
> redistribute the source doesn't somehow cause it to be instantly
> ported to other platforms by the grace of God.) These programs can be
> run on other operating systems with Wine. They can be ported to run on
> other operating systems with winelib.

I didn't say Wine is evil, just counter-productive. And it's totally my
own opinion. Its fortunate success, as Free Software, may have enabled
some users to use more Free Software, but it may also have enabled some
users to continue using non-free software, even when replacements exist.

> What I'm saying is that the matter of what supports replacing
> proprietary software with free software is complicated and merits a
> more textured analysis. In response, you seem to be saying that I hold
> a black-and-white view. This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me
> (though you have managed to quote me in a way that makes it look like
> I hold and black-and-white view, I will assume that this was not
> intentional).

Hms, you used the "ultimately" this "ultimately" that expression, sorry
if I took you for holding that BaW PoV!

Rui

-- 
Umlaut Zebra |ber alles!
Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 06:18:34PM -0700, L wrote:
> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:31:00AM -0700, L wrote:
>>   
>>> Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see 
>>> it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about 
>>> EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong.
>>> 
>> You seem to abuse the word hypocrisy. None of the definitions I find in
>> any dictionary fir your accusations.
>>
>> As such, I can't take your definition or accusations of "cults"
>> seriously, as you seem to be quite an angry convict of some sort of cult
>> too.
>>
>> Rui
>>   
>
>
> http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q8.html
>
> "*81 . 
> Hypocrisy*
>
> Cult members, including the leader, project their own sins and crimes onto 
> people outside of the cult:"

I don't take that as a definition of hypocrisy, but as a list of the
hypocrisies commonly found in cults.

BTW, one would say that the accusations of "cult" did not start from me
(or Richard), so I'd say you "accusers" fall straight on the "above all"
that's included in that link:

 "We are not a cult -- all of those other groups are. We work very hard
to make sure that our group doesn't turn into a cult like them."

Rui

-- 
Grudnuk demand sustenance!
Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Deanna Phillips]

Marco Peereboom writes:

> Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt.  Do I need to mail you
> some maxi pads?

Do I need to point out that you've attempted to insult someone
by comparing him to some bullshit stereotype about women?

Re: Suggested PF Setup when using BitTorrent?

[Ray Percival]

On Jan 5, 2008, at 17:15, "Joel Wiramu Pauling"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



The main annoyance I have had with bittorrent/p2p apps on openbsd is
the relatively low  file open limits. Pumping this is easy enough tho.


rtorrent sorted that for me nicely.



On 06/01/2008, Leonardo Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Maybe those watchdog timeouts have nothing to do with bittorrent, and
are probably more related to nic problems. Have you tried running  
your

torrent client with a different network card?


On Jan 5, 2008 4:22 PM, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Is there any suggested PF setup when using BitTorrent?

Right now, the biggest problem I have when using BitTorrent is  
watchdog

timeouts.

Thanks,

Brian




  





Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs






--
An OpenBSD user... and that's all you need to know =)

Please, send private emails to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Reid Nichol]

--- Shane J Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 06/01/2008, at 3:28 AM, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> > putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'
> 
> Huh? OpenBSD is built from free software and allows users the freedom
> to do what they please, even if that means running non-free software.
> You have a strange idea of "free".
>
> An OpenBSD user exercising freedom of choice, by choosing to use some
 
> non-free software, does not make OpenBSD non or less free.

No shit!  They go ahead and redefine what 'free' means and they try to
criticise people for still using dictionaries.  Kinda says something
about the level they're working on.


best regards,
Reid Nichol

President Bush says:

War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength


  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Re: Richard Stallman...

[johan beisser]

On Jan 5, 2008, at 4:56 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:


Yes. But even if it's legally redistributable, the question remains
wether it's free software or not.

Fortunately OpenBSD is Free Software. Unfortunately it recommends and
distributes proprietary software on it's servers (and it wasn't  
because

some user wrote some text on a wiki page).


"Recommends?" Where does it "recommend?" Please, show me a single URL  
where OpenBSD "recommends" software that's not in the base system.


If you said "makes available" I'd probably not bothered having  
responded to your ongoing drivel.




Only if they were using it like those sissy pseudo-fans of Free  
Software

which changed to Apple MacOS X just because it's "unix" (erms...) and
pretty, and works and has the apps.

That is: they'd use it without any soul.


Actually, I like OS X just fine. "non-free" and all. As a workstation,  
it's hard to beat. Especially since fighting to make KDE or GNOME  
"just work" for me in all aspects I need has proven tiresome and  
annoying.


Darwin, for what it's worth, is just as 'free' as Linux or gNewsense.  
Due to some licensing by Apple, parts of it are not as "free" as  
OpenBSD.


Then again, I know I don't have a soul. I like stuff that "just works"  
with out having to "fight to make it work."



There needs to be "soul" into the decision, or else it's just like
choosing clothing. Does she use OpenBSD because she wants to use a  
Free
Software operating system? If so, what have you done to help her get  
rid

of her dependency on proprietary software?


Explain "soul." As in "be a 'soul' into the decision."  I see you whip  
another four letter word out, and I suspect it may have a different  
meaning, much like your odd definition of "free." For what it's worth,  
I've always interpreted OpenBSD's usage of "free" as "Free as in  
Liberty." You're "free" to take it, change it, make it your own, and  
do what you want. You're also "free" to not return your contributions  
to a derivative to OpenBSD.


So far, nothing you've said that I've read has related to this  
definition of "free." It's always "Free as in Costs Nothing," "Free as  
in Comes Without Warranty," and "Free, except not really free."


All I can speak for, is for myself: if I use OpenBSD because I like  
its
feature set, and if I deploy it as I can... that's the kind of user  
you
want to go away? I'd say you're better off cancelling the project,  
if it

depended on you.


Actually, I think the "Go Away" was more of a "shut up you silly  
little wanker." That doesn't stop you from being in the userbase, it's  
just a nice way to ask you to keep your trap shut until you have  
something really useful to say.

Re: Richard Stallman...

[L]

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:31:00AM -0700, L wrote:
  
Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see 
it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about 
EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong.


You seem to abuse the word hypocrisy. None of the definitions I find in
any dictionary fir your accusations.

As such, I can't take your definition or accusations of "cults"
seriously, as you seem to be quite an angry convict of some sort of cult
too.

Rui
  



http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q8.html

"*81 . 
Hypocrisy*


Cult members, including the leader, project their own sins and crimes 
onto people outside of the cult:"

Re: Suggested PF Setup when using BitTorrent?

[Joel Wiramu Pauling]

The main annoyance I have had with bittorrent/p2p apps on openbsd is
the relatively low  file open limits. Pumping this is easy enough tho.

On 06/01/2008, Leonardo Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe those watchdog timeouts have nothing to do with bittorrent, and
> are probably more related to nic problems. Have you tried running your
> torrent client with a different network card?
>
>
> On Jan 5, 2008 4:22 PM, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is there any suggested PF setup when using BitTorrent?
> >
> > Right now, the biggest problem I have when using BitTorrent is watchdog
> > timeouts.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   
> > 
> > Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
> > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> An OpenBSD user... and that's all you need to know =)
>
> Please, send private emails to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 06:34:49PM -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt.  Do I need to mail you some maxi
> pads?

Now that you mention it, shortly after this idiotic flame I started
receiving "tons" of spam.

I wonder if they're related...

Rui

-- 
Or is it?
Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Marco Peereboom]

Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt.  Do I need to mail you some maxi
pads?

On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 12:56:08AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 12:34:45PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:
> > > > According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary
> > > > system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it
> > > > is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links
> > > > to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system
> > > > instead of switching to a proprietary one ?
> > > 
> > > 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't "links"
> > ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ only contains software that can legally
> > be redistributed, not to mention that it is a repository for
> > software that a user *explicitely* installs, not something that
> > is part of the OS.
> 
> Yes. But even if it's legally redistributable, the question remains
> wether it's free software or not.
> 
> Fortunately OpenBSD is Free Software. Unfortunately it recommends and
> distributes proprietary software on it's servers (and it wasn't because
> some user wrote some text on a wiki page).
> 
> > > 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all
> > > 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating
> > >systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements
> > 
> > this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while
> > and stopped using it because a proprietary application they
> > depended on was not available; and i know people who would use
> > Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made
> > so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their
> > business and emacs integrates it so well.
> 
> Now THIS is wordplay and pure speculation.
> If GCC wasn't available or made so easy to use, they'd merely use another
> one. The reason they don't use a Free Software operating system as nothing
> to do with the availability of GCC.
> 
> Mostly its some stupid reason like managemente dictates usage of tool X
> which only works on Windows, for instance.
> 
> > If the proprietary application was available, the lost openbsd
> > users would be using *far more* free applications than the ones
> > that are currently using emacs/gcc on Windows.
> 
> Only if they were using it like those sissy pseudo-fans of Free Software
> which changed to Apple MacOS X just because it's "unix" (erms...) and
> pretty, and works and has the apps.
> 
> That is: they'd use it without any soul.
> 
> > > 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables
> > >running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as
> > >such de-incentivates the creation of replacements.
> > > 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence.
> > 
> > I don't follow the wine project and I don't know how well it works,
> > but getting Windows applications to run under a free system looks
> > very productive to me. It means that I can remove Windows from my
> > workstation without preventing my girlfriend from doing her work
> > or changing her habits. And as a strange side-effect, she would be
> > using a free system and many other free utilities.
> 
> There needs to be "soul" into the decision, or else it's just like
> choosing clothing. Does she use OpenBSD because she wants to use a Free
> Software operating system? If so, what have you done to help her get rid
> of her dependency on proprietary software?
> 
> Will she keep using it if (let's hope not) you ever break up?
> 
> > > > By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just
> > > > a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while
> > > > we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on
> > > > top of a free system with free tools. 
> > > 
> > > Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who "need" such non-free
> > > software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is
> > > that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of
> > > all users, you distribute non-free software.
> > 
> > I have not said such a thing and you are playing words again to prove
> > some point. If an OpenBSD user needs a package for work and does not
> > find it, he will switch to another system because he needs his work done.
> 
> Maybe for the desktop case, but then you have a whole sleuth of problems
> which users have a harder time dealing with than some software (like
> hardware support which in part because of NDA development *puah*
> supports a few more hardware).
> 
> > The packages in our ftp are packages we are legally allowed to distribute
> > and are not part of the system. Users need to explicitely install them if
> > they want so.
> >
> > Now, please, I suggest you get familiar with the goals and policy pages
> > bec

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:31:00AM -0700, L wrote:
> Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see 
> it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about 
> EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong.

You seem to abuse the word hypocrisy. None of the definitions I find in
any dictionary fir your accusations.

As such, I can't take your definition or accusations of "cults"
seriously, as you seem to be quite an angry convict of some sort of cult
too.

Rui

-- 
This statement is false.
Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 10:28:19AM -0800, Ray Percival wrote:
> don't like you. You think we rank up there with baby killers. I will NEVER 
> understand how that works so just FOAD and we can all be happy.

I think that "ranking" you mention is 100% your interpretation. :)

Rui

-- 
Or is it?
Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 12:34:45PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:
> > > According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary
> > > system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it
> > > is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links
> > > to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system
> > > instead of switching to a proprietary one ?
> > 
> > 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't "links"
>   ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ only contains software that can legally
>   be redistributed, not to mention that it is a repository for
>   software that a user *explicitely* installs, not something that
>   is part of the OS.

Yes. But even if it's legally redistributable, the question remains
wether it's free software or not.

Fortunately OpenBSD is Free Software. Unfortunately it recommends and
distributes proprietary software on it's servers (and it wasn't because
some user wrote some text on a wiki page).

> > 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all
> > 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating
> >systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements
> 
>   this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while
>   and stopped using it because a proprietary application they
>   depended on was not available; and i know people who would use
>   Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made
>   so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their
>   business and emacs integrates it so well.

Now THIS is wordplay and pure speculation.
If GCC wasn't available or made so easy to use, they'd merely use another
one. The reason they don't use a Free Software operating system as nothing
to do with the availability of GCC.

Mostly its some stupid reason like managemente dictates usage of tool X
which only works on Windows, for instance.

>   If the proprietary application was available, the lost openbsd
>   users would be using *far more* free applications than the ones
>   that are currently using emacs/gcc on Windows.

Only if they were using it like those sissy pseudo-fans of Free Software
which changed to Apple MacOS X just because it's "unix" (erms...) and
pretty, and works and has the apps.

That is: they'd use it without any soul.

> > 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables
> >running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as
> >such de-incentivates the creation of replacements.
> > 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence.
> 
>   I don't follow the wine project and I don't know how well it works,
>   but getting Windows applications to run under a free system looks
>   very productive to me. It means that I can remove Windows from my
>   workstation without preventing my girlfriend from doing her work
>   or changing her habits. And as a strange side-effect, she would be
>   using a free system and many other free utilities.

There needs to be "soul" into the decision, or else it's just like
choosing clothing. Does she use OpenBSD because she wants to use a Free
Software operating system? If so, what have you done to help her get rid
of her dependency on proprietary software?

Will she keep using it if (let's hope not) you ever break up?

> > > By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just
> > > a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while
> > > we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on
> > > top of a free system with free tools. 
> > 
> > Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who "need" such non-free
> > software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is
> > that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of
> > all users, you distribute non-free software.
> 
> I have not said such a thing and you are playing words again to prove
> some point. If an OpenBSD user needs a package for work and does not
> find it, he will switch to another system because he needs his work done.

Maybe for the desktop case, but then you have a whole sleuth of problems
which users have a harder time dealing with than some software (like
hardware support which in part because of NDA development *puah*
supports a few more hardware).

> The packages in our ftp are packages we are legally allowed to distribute
> and are not part of the system. Users need to explicitely install them if
> they want so.
>
> Now, please, I suggest you get familiar with the goals and policy pages
> because you tend to mix OpenBSD goals with the ones from the FSF.

Nopes, for what I read they're mostly the same, and these clear cut
proprietary cases are hysterically extreme points of view.

> > > > Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I
> > > > shouldn't even "hon

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Eliah Kagan]

I wrote:
> > discouraging development of free replacements to software? What would
> > you need to know to actually know that Wine was ultimately
> > counterproductive, or ultimately productive? When it comes right down

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> The world is not made of such extremes, fortunately. It is
> counterproductive in so far as to promoting the development of Free
> Software that replaces proprietary programs running on Windows.
>
> If this is not clear to you, please help me be more clear.

When you say the world is not made of such extremes, do you mean you
think the long-term effects of something are always unquantifiable?
That these specifically are unquantifiable? Indeed, if you could be
more clear, that would be helpful.

Suppose someone is unable to use Wine to run a proprietary program on
a free operating system. As a result, they never use the free
operating system. So they never use all the free programs that are
part of that operating system. Well most of those programs fulfill a
function that is also fulfilled (or sought to be fulfilled) by
proprietary programs. So by enabling them to use their proprietary
program in conjunction with a free operating system, they are also
using many free alternatives to many other proprietary programs. This
seems to promote development of software that replaces proprietary
programs.

There are also quite a few free programs that run only on Windows.
(Being able to redistribute a program and its source and modify and
redistribute the source doesn't somehow cause it to be instantly
ported to other platforms by the grace of God.) These programs can be
run on other operating systems with Wine. They can be ported to run on
other operating systems with winelib.

What I'm saying is that the matter of what supports replacing
proprietary software with free software is complicated and merits a
more textured analysis. In response, you seem to be saying that I hold
a black-and-white view. This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me
(though you have managed to quote me in a way that makes it look like
I hold and black-and-white view, I will assume that this was not
intentional).

-Eliah

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Gregg Reynolds]

On 1/5/08, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> There is no such thing as free as in beer.  This is one of the dumbest
> analogies I have ever heard.  Who came up with it anyway?  Was it the

Thank you.

But, like all good political slogans, it is stupid like a fox: the
hucksters who push it know that most people are too stupid to stop and
ask themselves whether it really means anything.  Kinda like "Mission
Accomplished", "Compassionate Conservativsm", "Guns don't kill people,
lead poisoning kills people", etc.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Gregg Reynolds]

On 1/5/08, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> When I said everybody, I meant Everybody. Not one person. Applying the
> same to OpenBSD, all that the people here do is bitch about and
> nothing more.

Yeah, I noticed that too.  Why, they haven't provided me with a free
upgrade for, what 2, 3 months?  It's a disgrace.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Rico Secada]

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 20:14:27 +0100
"Jacob Grydholt Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > You're missing the point why somebody is calling OpenBSD non-free.
> > Or supposedly why emacs runs on non-free.
> 
> And you apparently missed the posts where the leading developers of
> OpenBSD stated that they don't care about your definition of free. 

And my dad is stronger than your dad!

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Gregg Reynolds]

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Gregg Reynolds]

On 1/5/08, Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does ReactOS recommend non-free software?
> If so. please show me what it says, and the URL.

I have a better idea.  Why don't you do your own fucking homework.

Re: Suggested PF Setup when using BitTorrent?

[Leonardo Rodrigues]

Maybe those watchdog timeouts have nothing to do with bittorrent, and
are probably more related to nic problems. Have you tried running your
torrent client with a different network card?


On Jan 5, 2008 4:22 PM, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any suggested PF setup when using BitTorrent?
>
> Right now, the biggest problem I have when using BitTorrent is watchdog
> timeouts.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian
>
>
>
>
>   
> 
> Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
>



-- 
An OpenBSD user... and that's all you need to know =)

Please, send private emails to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Gilles Chehade]

On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 01:42:16AM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not
> > allow them to be redistributed with the system.
> >
> 
> You are talking of free as in freedom and not price, right? If the
> whole point was to avoid paying $$$ in OpenBSD, my bad.
> 

What has money to do with this ?
You sound like you have issues understanding, so I will make it as simple
as I can, please take the time to read a few times, and make sure you get
it, before replying to this mail:

- vendor A sells hardware that requires a firmware

- OpenBSD wants to support that hardware and needs the firmware
to be shipped, say in /etc/firmware/, to have the
hardware work out of the box

- vendor A says "if a customer wants the firmware, he must go
to out website and fill a registration form online".

- OpenBSD does not ship the firmware because it is not free
enough.

See ? This is an example, it is unrelated to money, and you still failed
to show us ONE point where we don't stick to our goals.

-- 
Gilles Chehade

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Marco Peereboom]

On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 01:28:53AM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> On Jan 6, 2008 12:26 AM, Siju George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Jan 5, 2008 11:28 PM, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the
> > > community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but
> > > wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things
> > > TM.
> > >
> >
> > This is your website right?
> >
> > http://guilt.bafsoft.net/links.html
> >
> > If you think OpenBSD is not free then why did you put it under Free
> > OSes in your site?
> >
> > ==
> >
> > Free OSes
> >
> > OpenBSD link
> > Debian link
> > Slackware link
> > Minix link
> > OpenSolaris link
> >
> > ==
> >
> 
> It even has Debian and Slackware; Which contain lots of non-free
> software. It's been a while since I removed links on that page. And
> for the information I very much use OpenBSD. Maybe I should change the
> title to "Free as in beer OSes".

There is no such thing as free as in beer.  This is one of the dumbest
analogies I have ever heard.  Who came up with it anyway?  Was it the
FSF by any chance?

> 
> > By now if you have been carefully studying you should have learned
> > that OpenBSD ans OpenSolaris are as far as east is from the west when
> > it comes to freedom?
> >
> 
> All I see is a set of groups spreading propaganda in their own
> interests. I take no sides. :-)

Wrong.  One spreads propaganda and accuses the other of bs.  The other
calls the bs out and proves conclusively that there is (let me use a FSF
word here) FUD.  Your arguments are stupid and you have been told
repeatedly so.  Don't like it?  stop replying.  I will continue to point
out that your arguments are a fallacy.

> 
> BSD 4.2 -> 4.4 -> 4.4 Lite -> OpenBSD; 4.2 -> SunOS -> OpenSolaris;
> Maybe someone might fork OpenBSD in the future and make money. Too
> early to decide.

Good for them.  We, the actual OpenBSD community, encourages others to
use our code.

> 
> > Or Are you also like RMS who knows nothing but opens his big mouth to
> > utter nonsense?
> >
> 
> I'm not RMS and don't compare one person with another.

You sound like him.

> 
> > Go to sleep and have a good night and come back in the morning with a
> > fresh mind :-)
> >
> 
> It's 1:25 am already. With some luck I can keep replying and stay awake ;)
> 
> >
> > Yup you are so important and famous that everyone should be
> > discouraged about what you think and say!
> >
> 
> I'm not forcing that opinion on anybody. Like it or leave it.

And you have been told by many that your opinion has no bearing.
Repeating it won't make it so.

> 
> 
> -- 
> Karthik
> http://guilt.bafsoft.net

Re: [Fwd: Open-Hardware]

[Alexander Terekhov]

On Jan 5, 2008 5:57 PM, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Could you please respond to all paragraphs that I wrote?  I really want
> to understand...

God pointed his finger at his anointed prophet Richard Stallman

http://linux.ues.edu.sv/servidor/maracosas/bruno2d/richard-stallman.jpg

and intoned "Thou art the leader of all things programmed. Go forth and
spread the word".

And R.M.S. ventured forth and spake "Let there be copyleft"! And there
was copyleft and the Lord saw that it was good.

The Lord then commanded, "Collect donations from your gullible
worshipers and venture forth to all the countries of the world and
sample the lavish food and wine whilst delivering the word.

And Richard grew fat and happy during all his days.

:-)

regards,
alexander.

Re: amd64 assembly registers behavior and function calls

[Ted Unangst]

On 1/5/08, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are register values preserved between function calls on amd64?  I'm pretty 
> sure
> they are whipped out on i386, but I'm sure about amd64.
>
> Do I need to write parameters to %rbp offset, then follow the x86-abi for
> registers to write to before making the function call?  When I disassemble C
> code, it looks like the parameters are written to %rbp, then to the registers
> per the x86-84 abi, and then the function is called?  Is this the preferred 
> way
> to write function calls?  And I would use the same method to save the return
> value in %rax, right?

it should be spilling the old register values to the stack, not the
new arguments.  arguments after 4 do go on the stack though.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[L]

Reid Nichol wrote:

--- Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  

Use of non-free software is highly harmful to your
computer and ethics.



Please cite a piece of software that can harm my computer merely
because it is "non-free" in the FSF/GNU sense.  And you should probably
qualify that ethics remark with: Should you be an extremist of sorts...


  


Eggs are harmful because they do not come with reproductive chickens.

Books are harmful because they can be photocopied and we are not allowed 
to resell them without complicated permission first.


The photocopier is the machine that makes copying books virtually free.. 
similar to CD-ROM drives.


The chicken is the machine that makes copying eggs virtually free.. 
similar to CD-ROM drives.


Yet there is no free book license or free egg license, because personal 
source comments in code are different than personal comments and 
algorithms on paper in O'Reilly books.


Source comments, inside code.. ARE a book. My code always contains 
plenty of personal comments around my algorithms explaining why I came 
up with that algorithm and how the person can use the algorithm.



L505

Re: delete deleted data

[L]

L wrote:

Unix Fan wrote:

But either way, no such utility exists to restore data that has been 
overwritten.. regardless of the "algorithms" used.



  


Unless there was a magnetic offline hardware utility of some sort that 
scanned magnetic fields?





http://www.actionfront.com/ts_dataremoval.aspx

"It has been suggested that an electron microscope could be used to read 
and interpret any patterns that were not fully *overwritten* by the 
process." *

*

"Electron microscopes have been used to detect and identify *magnetic* 
regions smaller than the fluxes used to represent data on a 200 megabyte 
*disk* *drive*. Unfortunately, at best, this type of process could be 
accomplished at a rate of perhaps 1 bit per second. Furthermore, since 
virtually every *drive* in production today records two or more 
*magnetic* fluxes (due to R.L.L. recording) to represent each bit the 
actual rate could be considerably slower."

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[L]

Karthik Kumar wrote:

Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not
allow them to be redistributed with the system.




You are talking of free as in freedom and not price, right? If the
whole point was to avoid paying $$$ in OpenBSD, my bad.

  


The GNG foundation speaks of free as in sex,  not cost.

Firmware goes into software.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[L]

Karthik Kumar wrote:

 It's been a while since I removed links on that page. And
for the information I very much use OpenBSD. Maybe I should change the
title to "Free as in beer OSes".

  

No. Free is free.

Free as in beer is unethical to children who view the website and wonder 
what beer tastes like and get drunk because they read beer was something 
that was "good" on the GNU site. Since free as in beer is on the site, 
it restricts children from knowing what the site means as they have 
never tried beer. But now they want to drink under the age because of 
Stallman.


Stop playing with phrases.

Free as in sex, is what you use. That way, you confuse people even more. 
The software and hardware involved, makes more sense to everyone when it 
is explained in terms of sexuality.


http://z505.com/gng/

Re: delete deleted data

[L]

Unix Fan wrote:

L wrote:

  
Restoring files from FAT partitions is easy.. I use fatback(http://sf.net/projects/fatback)... 



  

I will check that one out..


But either way, no such utility exists to restore data that has been overwritten.. 
regardless of the "algorithms" used.


  


Unless there was a magnetic offline hardware utility of some sort that 
scanned magnetic fields?

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 01:51:22PM -0500, Eliah Kagan wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 12:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> > 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables
> >running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as
> >such de-incentivates the creation of replacements.
> > 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence.

(...)

> discouraging development of free replacements to software? What would
> you need to know to actually know that Wine was ultimately
> counterproductive, or ultimately productive? When it comes right down

The world is not made of such extremes, fortunately. It is
counterproductive in so far as to promoting the development of Free
Software that replaces proprietary programs running on Windows.

If this is not clear to you, please help me be more clear.

Rui

-- 
Umlaut Zebra |ber alles!
Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174
Celebrate Mungday
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Re: Running dhclient on CARP interfaces

[Rolf Sommerhalder]

The really cool combination of CARP and ifstated enabled a nice
work-around. The attached ifstated.conf works great in my
active-passive firewall cluster setup. At least it survived all
violent testing conducted over the past few hours. But it still needs
to prove itself in the longer term.

Actually, this solution does more than simply running dhclient on CARP
would do. With one exception: I could not you figure out how to
transition from a passive-active firewall cluster to an active-active
configuration without having a CARP interface with a dynamic IP
address that connects to the ISP. Therefore, I would still be
interested in getting dhclient to work on a CARP interface.

Also, I welcome your feedback about the solution outlined below.

Thanks,
Rolf


A few remarks on the ifstated.conf shown below:
a) vlan11 is a VLAN bound to the same NIC as carp12. dhclient is run
on vlan11 (Actually, carp12 is bound to vlan11, which in turn is bound
to the physical NIC liniking to upstream).. dhclient assigns the
dynamic IP address to vlan11 whenever a node of a cluster is in master
state. Nodes in backup state kill dhclient, delete the dynamic IP
address from their vlan11, change the default route from the ISP
router to the firewall's virtual cluster address (which is here
carp100 = 10.0.0.1) and kill and restart some daemons with some
modified parameters:
- dhcpd runs only on the master node;
- ntpd pn the backup node(s) get their time reference from the master
node, to avoid doubling the load on external time servers;
- only one ez-ipupdate instance running on the master node takes care
of updating my dynamic DNS service provider;

b) carp12 is a CARP interface on the same NIC that connects to the ISP
modem. carp12 is bound to a fixed IP address. The ifstated
configuration below uses it just for detecting the state(-changes) of
the upstream link, e.g. it is not the CARP interface I would like to
run dhclient on (which would be carp11).

c) You can replace vlan11 by any other vlan, or by a phsyical
interface, such as fxp2 for example. You can replace carp12 by any
other CARP interface as long as it is a reliable state indicator of
each node in the cluster.


[EMAIL PROTECTED]:root]# cat /etc/ifstated.conf
init-state startState

carpUp = "carp12.link.up"
carpDown = "!carp12.link.up"

state startState {
 if $carpUp
  set-state masterState
 if $carpDown
  set-state backupState
}

state masterState {
 init {
  # assert services are killed to avoid duplicates in case the were still up,
  # for ex. after a restart of ifstated restart while masterState was never left
  run "/usr/bin/pkill -9 ntpd"
  run "/usr/bin/pkill -9 dhcpd"
  run "/usr/bin/pkill -9 ez-ipupdate"
  run "/usr/bin/pkill -9 dhclient"

  run "/sbin/dhclient vlan11"
  run "/usr/local/bin/ez-ipupdate -c /etc/ez-ipupdate.conf"
  run "/usr/sbin/dhcpd"
  #run "/usr/sbin/ntpd -s -f /etc/ntpd_masterState.conf"
  run "/usr/sbin/ntpd -f /etc/ntpd_masterState.conf"
 }
 if $carpDown set-state backupState
}

state backupState {
 init {
  run "/usr/bin/pkill -9 ntpd"
  run "/usr/bin/pkill -9 dhcpd"
  run "/usr/bin/pkill -9 ez-ipupdate"
  run "/usr/bin/pkill -9 dhclient"

  run "/sbin/ifconfig vlan11 delete"
  run "/sbin/route change default 10.0.0.1"
  #run "/usr/sbin/ntpd -s -f /etc/ntpd_backupState.conf"
  run "/usr/sbin/ntpd -f /etc/ntpd_backupState.conf"
 }
 if $carpUp set-state masterState
}

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[William Boshuck]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:39:17PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 11:20 PM, William Boshuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > > > On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users 
> > > > installing
> > > > non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs 
> > > > to
> > > > be documented for users to get their job done faster.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> > > putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'
> >
> > The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free.  It is not
> > there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this
> > or that.
> >
> 
> You're missing the point why somebody is calling OpenBSD non-free. 

Such a somebody is mistaken.  Full stop.
The point "why somebody" issues mistaken pronouncements is not
my concern.


> > Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts
> > in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the
> > OpenBSD developers are against blobs.  Theo, in particular, wrote
> > at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the
> > reasons.  You should look towards the beginning of the threads,
> > because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience
> > with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully
> > enough, or perhaps not at all).
> >
> 
> Here is one:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-March/081313.html

A swing and a miss.

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

Oh, the real troll just arrived (one more list where he get's to the
kill file).

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:52:34PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 6:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> > I'm not from the FSF.
> 
> Yeah, yeah. You're a kind of Richard Bruce "Dick" Cheney of "National
> Association for Free Software", aren't you? A kind of fsf er.. fsa.pt
> (National) guy. No?
> 
> http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=pt_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fansol.org%2ffilosofia

Which is a totally disparate entity from the FSF, and only exists
through the work of volunteers.

It promotes Free Software, be it any BSD operating system or GNU/Linux
one, or any other Free Software program.

Rui

-- 
This statement is false.
Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174
Celebrate Mungday
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Shane J Pearson]

On 06/01/2008, at 3:28 AM, Karthik Kumar wrote:

On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users  
installing
non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this  
needs to

be documented for users to get their job done faster.



If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'


Huh? OpenBSD is built from free software and allows users the freedom  
to do what they please, even if that means running non-free software.  
You have a strange idea of "free".


An OpenBSD user exercising freedom of choice, by choosing to use some  
non-free software, does not make OpenBSD non or less free.



Shane

Re: Richard Stallman...

[William Boshuck]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 05:53:40PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> 
> ... you distribute non-free software.

It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that
this is a false statement.

> No, I am a victim 

Only because you elect to remain uninformed.

Suggested PF Setup when using BitTorrent?

[Brian]

Is there any suggested PF setup when using BitTorrent?  

Right now, the biggest problem I have when using BitTorrent is watchdog
timeouts.

Thanks,

Brian




  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Jacob Grydholt Jensen]

(apologies to Karthik who will receive this mail twice)
On 05/01/2008, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 11:20 PM, William Boshuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > > > On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users 
> > > > installing
> > > > non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs 
> > > > to
> > > > be documented for users to get their job done faster.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> > > putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'
> >
> > The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free.  It is not
> > there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this
> > or that.
> >
>
> You're missing the point why somebody is calling OpenBSD non-free. Or
> supposedly why emacs runs on non-free.

And you apparently missed the posts where the leading developers of
OpenBSD stated that they don't care about your definition of free. As
a non-English speaker I am aware of the multifacetted English word
'Free' and its many connotations. So it is not hard for OpenBSD to
name itself free. Coming out and saying that OpenBSD should not call
itself free because it freely allows users to install non-free
software is gNonsense.

> > > ; You shouldn't be
> > > fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather,
> > > probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'.
> >
> > Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts
> > in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the
> > OpenBSD developers are against blobs.  Theo, in particular, wrote
> > at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the
> > reasons.  You should look towards the beginning of the threads,
> > because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience
> > with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully
> > enough, or perhaps not at all).
> >
>
> Here is one:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-March/081313.html
>
> Notice how Theo talks about "because their firmware images were not
> free enough to ship in our releases"
>
> I suppose you can now explain the meaning of the term "free" in
> firmware in this context? Don't assume people don't read before
> replying in here.

I assume that Theo were not referring to firmware supposed to run in
the kernel but on some kind of expansion card. Furthermore, I assume
that the original firmware license prohibited free distribution. In
any case: what is your point?

Jacob Grydholt

Re: Advice requested on security issues

[Jussi Peltola]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:36:04AM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> Perhaps you could use the banking machine as your main access point,
> running apps on the main box via ssh.  Would that introduce any
> insecurity in the banking machine?
I certainly wouldn't do sensitive things on an X server with untrusted
clients. What makes you think a remote X client is any less dangerous
than a local one?

-- 
Jussi Peltola

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Tony Abernethy]

Karthik Kumar  wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 11:20 PM, William Boshuck 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > > > On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind 
> our users installing
> > > > non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is 
> where this needs to
> > > > be documented for users to get their job done faster.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> > > putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'
> >
> > The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free.  It is not
> > there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this
> > or that.
> >
> 
> You're missing the point why somebody is calling OpenBSD non-free. Or
> supposedly why emacs runs on non-free.
> 
> > > ; You shouldn't be
> > > fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather,
> > > probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'.
> >
> > Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts
> > in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the
> > OpenBSD developers are against blobs.  Theo, in particular, wrote
> > at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the
> > reasons.  You should look towards the beginning of the threads,
> > because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience
> > with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully
> > enough, or perhaps not at all).
> >
> 
> Here is one:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-Marc
> h/081313.html
> 
> Notice how Theo talks about "because their firmware images were not
> free enough to ship in our releases"

in context: "because
their firmware images were not free enough to ship in our releases,
and after 6 months of wasting our time and being stalemated, we
informed Qlogic and our user community (as well as YOUR user
community) that we were removing the support for their controllers.  A
few days later the firmware was free."

Are you complaining because Theo actually accomplished something?

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Reid Nichol]

--- Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Use of non-free software is highly harmful to your
> computer and ethics.

Please cite a piece of software that can harm my computer merely
because it is "non-free" in the FSF/GNU sense.  And you should probably
qualify that ethics remark with: Should you be an extremist of sorts...


> On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of
> non-free software must come clean first: No clean, no talk.

Sophistry.  If there is problems in logic, etc then one need not be of
a certain type (with respect to what you're saying) to realize that nor
point it out.  To say so is asinine (above as well).



On a more general note, I'd (and I imagine a lot of people on misc@
too) would appreciate before any more replies are sent from the
religious people, please religious people, read:

Pay special attention to the "Fanaticism" type:
http://criticalsnips.wordpress.com/category/postman/

Link to full text within:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_bullshit


And really really reflect on this before you reply.



best regards,
Reid Nichol

President Bush says:

War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength


  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Karthik Kumar]

> Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not
> allow them to be redistributed with the system.
>

You are talking of free as in freedom and not price, right? If the
whole point was to avoid paying $$$ in OpenBSD, my bad.

> --
> Gilles Chehade
>



-- 
Karthik
http://guilt.bafsoft.net

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Marco Peereboom]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:51:39PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated
> > at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read.
> >
> 
> I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you
> like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written in
> a stupid web page until you live up to them.

And we do unlike some netcook who likes to twist words.

> 
> >
> > > > OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object
> > > > and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can
> > > > buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright
> > > > on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source
> > > > for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from
> > > > the sources on the cvs. That's it.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it
> > > from the CVS.
> > >
> >
> > We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow someone to
> > install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the system
> > and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against goals,
> > which you do not want to read.
> >
> 
> I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify "to encourage
> people to use
> non-free software", but I see that happening anyway.

You do?

What does that make you?  You are the one making the decision to install
it.  If you can use the ports system you probably know at a high level
what you are doing.  You might or might not care about "free" (your
definition) or "non-free" (again your definition) software.  You are
calling that person retarded and unable to make up his/her own mind.
That attitude is repugnant and oppressive.  I hope for you that your
freedom won't be taken from you and that someone calls you retarded for
making your own decisions.

> 
> > Please stop making uninformed claims, read the goals and policy page which
> > are accessible from the very home page of the project.
> 
> I am not uninformed. What makes you say that? You, sir are biased
> towards OpenBSD
> and you can say what you want but it doesn't make your version of the
> truth any better.
> 
> > >
> >
> > You failed to read two pages and to point out where we are going against
> > our own claims. My call: troll.
> >
> 
> Your own claims?
> 
> 1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe
> flash player vulnerabilities.

Which doesn't run on OpenBSD but does run on Linux.  Oh oh wait,
GNU/Linux because FSF did all the work; oh wait it didn't it is just a
farce.

> 2. Do not let serious problems sit unsolved. I see that you people
> only fight about it and pretend it has never been a problem.

It isn't a problem and until you get that through your skull you'll keep
parroting one FSF representative.

> 
> > --
> > Gilles Chehade
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Karthik
> http://guilt.bafsoft.net

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[William Boshuck]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:28:24PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> 
> I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the
> community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but
> wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things
> TM.

Great.  The first step is to inform yourself to that your role
evolves from one who listens to one who understands.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Karthik Kumar]

On Jan 6, 2008 12:26 AM, Siju George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 11:28 PM, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the
> > community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but
> > wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things
> > TM.
> >
>
> This is your website right?
>
> http://guilt.bafsoft.net/links.html
>
> If you think OpenBSD is not free then why did you put it under Free
> OSes in your site?
>
> ==
>
> Free OSes
>
> OpenBSD link
> Debian link
> Slackware link
> Minix link
> OpenSolaris link
>
> ==
>

It even has Debian and Slackware; Which contain lots of non-free
software. It's been a while since I removed links on that page. And
for the information I very much use OpenBSD. Maybe I should change the
title to "Free as in beer OSes".

> By now if you have been carefully studying you should have learned
> that OpenBSD ans OpenSolaris are as far as east is from the west when
> it comes to freedom?
>

All I see is a set of groups spreading propaganda in their own
interests. I take no sides. :-)

BSD 4.2 -> 4.4 -> 4.4 Lite -> OpenBSD; 4.2 -> SunOS -> OpenSolaris;
Maybe someone might fork OpenBSD in the future and make money. Too
early to decide.

> Or Are you also like RMS who knows nothing but opens his big mouth to
> utter nonsense?
>

I'm not RMS and don't compare one person with another.

> Go to sleep and have a good night and come back in the morning with a
> fresh mind :-)
>

It's 1:25 am already. With some luck I can keep replying and stay awake ;)

>
> Yup you are so important and famous that everyone should be
> discouraged about what you think and say!
>

I'm not forcing that opinion on anybody. Like it or leave it.


-- 
Karthik
http://guilt.bafsoft.net

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Jacob Grydholt Jensen]

On 05/01/2008, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify "to encourage
> people to use
> non-free software", but I see that happening anyway.

And so what? I think you were trying to prove that OpenBSD were not
living up to their goals. Instead you are repeating what RMS started
out with. Try actually showing us one of OpenBSD's goals that the
project is not following.

> Your own claims?
>
> 1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe
> flash player vulnerabilities.

What are you on about? As people have tried to explain again and
again, OpenBSD does not ship with adobe flash player. Did you
understand the "Secure by Default" mode?


Jacob Grydholt

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Gilles Chehade]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:51:39PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated
> > at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read.
> >
> 
> I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you
> like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written in
> a stupid web page until you live up to them.
> 

You are spouting non-sense. These are goals we fight for and believe in.
It is only from the eyes of a fsf zealot that words are meant to be
twisted. Again: show us all where we are doing the opposite of what is
written in these pages.


> >
> > > > OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object
> > > > and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can
> > > > buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright
> > > > on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source
> > > > for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from
> > > > the sources on the cvs. That's it.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it
> > > from the CVS.
> > >
> >
> > We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow someone to
> > install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the system
> > and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against goals,
> > which you do not want to read.
> >
> 
> I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify "to encourage
> people to use
> non-free software", but I see that happening anyway.
>

The goals do not specify "prevent users from running non-free software".
The goals do not mention anything about what people ought to do with our
software, we are NOT the fucking FSF. 


> > Please stop making uninformed claims, read the goals and policy page which
> > are accessible from the very home page of the project.
> 
> I am not uninformed. What makes you say that? You, sir are biased
> towards OpenBSD
> and you can say what you want but it doesn't make your version of the
> truth any better.
> 

You are misinformed because you keep arguing about things as if they are
wrong, yet they are only wrong from an FSF point of view. It is not wrong
and unethical to run proprietary software, I do it every day and I do not
feel wrong about it. It is only unethical in the eyes of a fsf zealot.

Please point out where OpenBSD is in breach with its goals and license.


> > >
> >
> > You failed to read two pages and to point out where we are going against
> > our own claims. My call: troll.
> >
> 
> Your own claims?
> 
> 1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe
> flash player vulnerabilities.
>

OpenBSD does not ship with a flash player. If you have one, you installed
it yourself as I don't have one.


> 2. Do not let serious problems sit unsolved. I see that you people
> only fight about it and pretend it has never been a problem.
>

Show us a sitting problem that needs to be resolved, until know you have
been talking and failed to point out anything I kindly asked you to point.


-- 
Gilles Chehade

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Andrés]

Richard, Linux is not free software, as you have already stated,
please change your religion, so users don't get confused.

"Emacs was originally a text editor, but it became a way of life and a
religion. To join the Church of Emacs, you need only say the
Confession of the Faith three times:

There is no system but GNU, and Linux is one of its kernels."

http://www.stallman.org/saint.html

Greetings!

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Eliah Kagan]

On Jan 5, 2008 12:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables
>running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as
>such de-incentivates the creation of replacements.
> 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence.

It makes good sense to establish principles and stick to them. It
makes sense that different people have different principles and will
criticize one another on the basis of them. But I think it is
important to recognize that what furthers adoption of free software
over non-free software is complicated and does not seem to follow from
any simple rule. For instance, it seems to you that the Wine project
is counter-productive. But the Wine project is inseparable from
winelib. If you're not already familiar with winelib, check it
out--then I'd be curious to know if you still think the Wine project
is counterproductive, considering that there are many free
applications that are Windows-only for technical reasons arising out
of decisions made early in their development.

Separately from this, Wine enables people who retain Windows for a few
applications to switch over entirely to other operating systems. How
do you balance this effect against your suggested effect of
discouraging development of free replacements to software? What would
you need to know to actually know that Wine was ultimately
counterproductive, or ultimately productive? When it comes right down
to it, a lot of the arguments about what do and will have what effect
don't stand up unless supported with statistical evidence. This is the
sort of thing you could publish a paper on, or maybe a book. But there
is no reason for anybody to buy any argument about what specific kinds
of free software encourage adoption of free software that doesn't
provide something approaching hard evidence.

It is one thing to say that there is a way for a project to be run
that is most ethical. It is another to say that this will have the
most ethical effects in the long run. There is no reason to believe
that what has the best effects in the long run is necessarily the
right thing, but then again, if it turns out that the "ethical" thing
usually leads to unethical results in the long run, it is worth
examining one's ethics.

-Eliah

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Andrés]

Richard, isn't:

"Run GNOME in a **VMWare Player** in a Linux virtual machine."

Or:

"Run GNOME on a virtual machine using QEMU on Linux or **Parallels**
for **Mac** or Linux."

promoting the use of non-free software?

http://torrent.gnome.org/

GNOME _is_ a GNU package.

Greetings!

Re: Advice requested on security issues

[Russell Gadd]

On 05/01/2008, Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > > 2: Space for the P3 is limited and I would like to remove its printer
> and
> > > print bank statements across the LAN on the main PC (running Linux, or
> maybe
> > > FreeBSD in future) using CUPS. Does this introduce security risks?
>
> Why would you need CUPS on the P3?  Shouldn't the bsd lpd be able to
> send the bank statement over to the other box to then get formatted and
> printed?  lpd is in base already.


I wasn't aware that LPD could do the remote printing - I've always used CUPS
on Linux - thanks for the info. This seems the favourable option since I
then don't need to introduce CUPS into the OBSD box.



> Does running Firefox on the banking computer, even if it is running on
> OpenBSD, cause any concerns?  Is there a more secure browser that will
> still work with the bank's system?  I'm assuming that the base Lynx
> won't work (if it will, just use that).


No, I can't see Lynx doing this job  - yes Firefox is a concern as it is
becoming so popular and seems to have a lot of security updates which may be
indicative of its lack of quality (certainly not up to OBSD standards).
However some banks seem to create complex web pages so the browser needs to
be reasonably good at rendering pages. If there is a graphical browser which
is more secure and might do the job, I'd be pleased to know about it.

Will you sit down at a separate screen/keyboard on the OpenBSD banking
> computer or will you access it via ssh?


I had planned to use a separate screen/keyboard. Keeping things physically
separate is part of the security as there is less dependence on avoiding
errors in setup. I might look to acquire an old laptop in due course to
reduce space requirements.

Would forwarding X via ssh from
> the banking machine to your main machine make banking any less secure?

I suppose if the main machine were infected it could read your
> keystrokes as you type in passwords.


Indeed

Perhaps you could use the banking
> machine as your main access point, running apps on the main box via ssh.
> Would that introduce any insecurity in the banking machine?
>
>
I don't know the answer to your last question - was it rhetorical?
Actually I hadn't thought of this. Are you saying that nothing could get
down the ssh "tunnel" from the main box into the banking box? I guess I will
have to look into how ssh works - something I've not had any need to use.
The banking box has poorer graphics capability so this wouldn't do a good
job of running main box apps. But something to keep in mind.

Thanks for all your comments - appreciated.

Re: OT YAG Re: delete deleted data

[STeve Andre']

On Saturday 05 January 2008 09:57:54 Diana Eichert wrote:
> Okay, someone touched on this so I'll follow it a little further.
>
> Say you pull the platter(s) out of the drive and now start analysing the
> data as analog voltage levels and not highs/lows with threshold.  Also,
> get the data off the platter(s) by driving a head across it in different
> directions.  Now start doing signal processing on the data set(s) you've
> acquired.
>
> Any EE worth their weight in salt understands signal processing.  I do
> believe a lot of younger engineers have grown up in the 1 & 0 digital
> world and forget about analog.
>
> g.day
>
> diana

Yeah, analog stuff is sorely lacking, as if RF stuff today.

My only comment about data resurrection is that I'll bet that good
analog data from the disk varies with the density.  Getting data off
an 800M to couple G disk?  Absolutely.  But I wonder far more about
a 1T disk.  I'm not saying it can't be done; logic says that disks of
the modern era should still be destroyed, but I'd love to know how
much data gets garbled when sniffing really high density disks.

--STeve Andre'

amd64 assembly registers behavior and function calls

[Brian]

Are register values preserved between function calls on amd64?  I'm pretty sure
they are whipped out on i386, but I'm sure about amd64.

Do I need to write parameters to %rbp offset, then follow the x86-abi for
registers to write to before making the function call?  When I disassemble C
code, it looks like the parameters are written to %rbp, then to the registers
per the x86-84 abi, and then the function is called?  Is this the preferred way
to write function calls?  And I would use the same method to save the return
value in %rax, right?

Thanks,

Brian 


  

Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hello mini-RMS,

Happy New Year greetings from gnu.misc.discuss! :-)

On Jan 5, 2008 6:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> I'm not from the FSF.

Yeah, yeah. You're a kind of Richard Bruce "Dick" Cheney of "National
Association for Free Software", aren't you? A kind of fsf er.. fsa.pt
(National) guy. No?

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=pt_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fansol.org%2ffilosofia

Peace out.

regards,
alexander.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Tony Abernethy]

Siju George wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 PM, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > When I said everybody, I meant Everybody. Not one person. 
> Applying the
> > same to OpenBSD, all that the people here do is bitch about and
> > nothing more.
> >
> >
> 
> NO! people here are not bitching, May be you are.
> People here are setting the record straight when there is a liar
> spreading wrong information about the project when he himself is the
> one breaking his rules an not OpenBSD.
> 
> I you really meant everybody why did you not cc to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Even now after you were asked to do it?
> 
methinks the proper word is: AMEN!

Unless I'm really confused, this *IS* 
misc@OPENBSD.ORG
not
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Gilles Chehade]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:39:17PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
>
> Here is one:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-March/081313.html
> 
> Notice how Theo talks about "because their firmware images were not
> free enough to ship in our releases"
>
> I suppose you can now explain the meaning of the term "free" in
> firmware in this context? Don't assume people don't read before
> replying in here.
> 

I don't know about people, but YOU don't read before replying.
Please, read before you reply ... you are calling for rudeness.

Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not
allow them to be redistributed with the system. 

-- 
Gilles Chehade

Re: OT YAG Re: delete deleted data

[johan beisser]

On Jan 5, 2008, at 8:06 AM, Shane J Pearson wrote:


I think the first computers I witnessed in a work place, were  
actually analog computers (Navy).


Where a mix of humans, transistors, valves, gears and three-phase  
motors/sensors, got the job done.;-)


They're still in use as of the late 90s.

Re: OT YAG Re: delete deleted data

[Diana Eichert]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2008, Shane J Pearson wrote:
SNIP
Where a mix of humans, transistors, valves, gears and three-phase 
motors/sensors, got the job done.;-)


Shane


No coal and steam?

I had to say it.

diana

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Siju George]

On Jan 5, 2008 11:28 PM, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the
> community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but
> wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things
> TM.
>

This is your website right?

http://guilt.bafsoft.net/links.html

If you think OpenBSD is not free then why did you put it under Free
OSes in your site?

==

Free OSes

OpenBSD link
Debian link
Slackware link
Minix link
OpenSolaris link

==

By now if you have been carefully studying you should have learned
that OpenBSD ans OpenSolaris are as far as east is from the west when
it comes to freedom?

Or Are you also like RMS who knows nothing but opens his big mouth to
utter nonsense?

> > OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object
> > and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can
> > buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright
> > on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source
> > for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from
> > the sources on the cvs. That's it.
> >
>
> Yawn.
>

Go to sleep and have a good night and come back in the morning with a
fresh mind :-)


> > What you do with it is not of our matter and we do not prevent you from
> > installing a proprietary software on top of it. This is your call, what
> > you do with what we provide you is none of our business, as long as you
> > do not remove the copyright notice.
> >
>
> My call: all lies and ego.
>

Yup you are so important and famous that everyone should be
discouraged about what you think and say!

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Gilles Chehade]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 05:53:40PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:
> > > > Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ?
> > > > You are a troll.
> > > 
> > > Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or
> > > I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell.
> > >
> > 
> > You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that
> > you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is
> > different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF.
> 
> I'm not from the FSF.
>

I was making a generic statement. 


> > According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary
> > system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it
> > is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links
> > to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system
> > instead of switching to a proprietary one ?
> 
> 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't "links"

ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ only contains software that can legally
be redistributed, not to mention that it is a repository for
software that a user *explicitely* installs, not something that
is part of the OS.

> 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all
> 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating
>systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements

this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while
and stopped using it because a proprietary application they
depended on was not available; and i know people who would use
Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made
so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their
business and emacs integrates it so well.

If the proprietary application was available, the lost openbsd
users would be using *far more* free applications than the ones
that are currently using emacs/gcc on Windows.


> 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables
>running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as
>such de-incentivates the creation of replacements.
> 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence.
> 

I don't follow the wine project and I don't know how well it works,
but getting Windows applications to run under a free system looks
very productive to me. It means that I can remove Windows from my
workstation without preventing my girlfriend from doing her work
or changing her habits. And as a strange side-effect, she would be
using a free system and many other free utilities.


> > By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just
> > a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while
> > we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on
> > top of a free system with free tools. 
> 
> Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who "need" such non-free
> software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is
> that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of
> all users, you distribute non-free software.
>

I have not said such a thing and you are playing words again to prove
some point. If an OpenBSD user needs a package for work and does not
find it, he will switch to another system because he needs his work done.

For the convenience of these users, we provide a subsystem that allows
them to install the software they need and *that is not shipped with
our system*.

The packages in our ftp are packages we are legally allowed to distribute
and are not part of the system. Users need to explicitely install them if
they want so.

Now, please, I suggest you get familiar with the goals and policy pages
because you tend to mix OpenBSD goals with the ones from the FSF.


> > > Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I
> > > shouldn't even "honour" you with a reply.
> > 
> > I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for
> > helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just
> > like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a
> > person points at the flaws in your reasonning, grow up.
> 
> No, I am a victim and your (generically, not specifically you) attitude
> actually makes my relation with OpenBSD very frustrating.
>

It saddens me, but your (that's you and mr Stallman) attitude is very
irritating. I would suggest, for the benefit of all, that you both leave
as it would lessen your frustration and my irritation ...

Gilles

-- 
Gilles Chehade

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Ray Percival]

On Jan 5, 2008, at 9:53, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra  
wrote:

On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:

Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ?
You are a troll.


Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd  
expect or

I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell.



You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so  
that
you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why  
it is

different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF.


I'm not from the FSF.

According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a  
proprietary
system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it  
that it
is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them  
links
to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free  
system

instead of switching to a proprietary one ?


1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't "links"
2) using more free software is better than not running it at all
3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating
  systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software  
replacements

4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables
  running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as
  such de-incentivates the creation of replacements.
4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own  
independence.


By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run  
just
a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools,  
while
we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary  
application on

top of a free system with free tools.


Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who "need" such non- 
free

software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is
that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of
all users, you distribute non-free software.

Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in  
afterthought I

shouldn't even "honour" you with a reply.


I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude  
for
helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll.  
Just
like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim  
if a

person points


No, I am a victim and your (generically, not specifically you)  
attitude

actually makes my relation with OpenBSD very frustrating.


So GTFO. Oh and lose the sig on a public mailing list. You don't like  
us we don't like you. You think we rank up there with baby killers. I  
will NEVER understand how that works so just FOAD and we can all be  
happy.



Rui

--
Wibble.
Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174
Celebrate Mungday
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Siju George]

On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 PM, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> all that the people here do is bitch about and
> nothing more.
>

Most of the devs in here are busy coding and not contributing to this thread.
Theo and a few others were forced to respond because their project is
being slandered and they were forced to let the world know the truth
and expose a lying hippocrite.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Siju George]

On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 PM, Karthik Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> When I said everybody, I meant Everybody. Not one person. Applying the
> same to OpenBSD, all that the people here do is bitch about and
> nothing more.
>
>

NO! people here are not bitching, May be you are.
People here are setting the record straight when there is a liar
spreading wrong information about the project when he himself is the
one breaking his rules an not OpenBSD.

I you really meant everybody why did you not cc to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Even now after you were asked to do it?

Re: Richard Stallman...

[johan beisser]

[slight legibility edit]

On Jan 5, 2008, at 9:39 AM, Marco Peereboom wrote:


On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:30:36AM -0800, johan beisser wrote:

On Jan 5, 2008, at 6:31 AM, Richard Stallman wrote:
I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself.  To find  
out

the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to
check for me.


Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons  
opinions get
reflected in what you say? You don't have someone else factcheck,  
or double

check these facts yourself?



That's clearly a rhetorical question.


I've gathered that. I'm hoping for a proper answer.

Re: Richard Stallman...

[L]

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:
  

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:


On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:
  

Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ?
You are a troll.


Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or
I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell.

  

You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that
you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is
different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF.



I'm not from the FSF.

  

According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary
system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it
is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links
to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system
instead of switching to a proprietary one ?



1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't "links"
2) using more free software is better than not running it at all
  
Using openbsd is using free software.. using MORE free software than 
Windows Server 2003.


Using default openbsd and having an option to run Google search or ports 
is the same as using GCC and Emacs on windows with having the option to 
migrate to gnu/linux.. since ea lot of GCC users have never used 
linux/gnu ever.


Same Thing.

Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see 
it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about 
EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[L]

Unix Fan wrote:

As I've said, I think it's acceptable for free applications to run on



  

non-free platforms (and say that they do), because this doesn't



  

recommend the installation of those non-free platforms.  But free



  

systems should not recommend, suggest, or offer to install non-free



  

apps.





What is an operating system? An OS could be considered an "application", 


Emacs/XEmacs is an excellent Microsoft Operating system shell to run.
Manage your files and browse the web.

It is released under the GPL (general public license).

Running a program on Windows is not encouraging the use of Windows. 
Rather it is actually encouraging people to use Windows, you see. That's 
not the same thing.


People publish screenshots of Emacs running on MS Windows and post them 
on the internet, and this is the enemy of your freedom. It shows how 
excellent XEmacs/Emacs run on Windows so that they don't even have to 
run gNewSense.


When the dog wags his tail, the tail actually is wagging his dog. And 
when the tail wags the dog, the dog is actually wagging the tail. Not 
the other way around.


Oranges are free, grapefruits are not.
Oranges are free, grapefruits are not.
Oranges are free, grapefruits are not.

L505

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Karthik Kumar]

> Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated
> at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read.
>

I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you
like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written in
a stupid web page until you live up to them.

>
> > > OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object
> > > and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can
> > > buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright
> > > on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source
> > > for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from
> > > the sources on the cvs. That's it.
> > >
> >
> > Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it
> > from the CVS.
> >
>
> We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow someone to
> install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the system
> and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against goals,
> which you do not want to read.
>

I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify "to encourage
people to use
non-free software", but I see that happening anyway.

> Please stop making uninformed claims, read the goals and policy page which
> are accessible from the very home page of the project.

I am not uninformed. What makes you say that? You, sir are biased
towards OpenBSD
and you can say what you want but it doesn't make your version of the
truth any better.

> >
>
> You failed to read two pages and to point out where we are going against
> our own claims. My call: troll.
>

Your own claims?

1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe
flash player vulnerabilities.
2. Do not let serious problems sit unsolved. I see that you people
only fight about it and pretend it has never been a problem.

> --
> Gilles Chehade
>



-- 
Karthik
http://guilt.bafsoft.net

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Gilles Chehade]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:28:24PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > You are talking about unrelated matters, and mixing our goals with the
> > ones of your own community.
> >
> 
> I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the
> community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but
> wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things
> TM.
> 

Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated
at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read.


> > OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object
> > and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can
> > buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright
> > on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source
> > for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from
> > the sources on the cvs. That's it.
> >
> 
> Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it
> from the CVS.
> 

We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow someone to
install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the system
and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against goals,
which you do not want to read.

Please stop making uninformed claims, read the goals and policy page which
are accessible from the very home page of the project. When you do so, you
can freely point us where we are in breach with our claims, until then you
are just trolling.


> > What you do with it is not of our matter and we do not prevent you from
> > installing a proprietary software on top of it. This is your call, what
> > you do with what we provide you is none of our business, as long as you
> > do not remove the copyright notice.
> >
> 
> My call: all lies and ego.
> 

You failed to read two pages and to point out where we are going against
our own claims. My call: troll.

-- 
Gilles Chehade

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Karthik Kumar]

On Jan 5, 2008 11:20 PM, William Boshuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > > On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing
> > > non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to
> > > be documented for users to get their job done faster.
> > >
> >
> > If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> > putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'
>
> The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free.  It is not
> there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this
> or that.
>

You're missing the point why somebody is calling OpenBSD non-free. Or
supposedly why emacs runs on non-free.

> > ; You shouldn't be
> > fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather,
> > probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'.
>
> Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts
> in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the
> OpenBSD developers are against blobs.  Theo, in particular, wrote
> at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the
> reasons.  You should look towards the beginning of the threads,
> because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience
> with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully
> enough, or perhaps not at all).
>

Here is one:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-March/081313.html

Notice how Theo talks about "because their firmware images were not
free enough to ship in our releases"

I suppose you can now explain the meaning of the term "free" in
firmware in this context? Don't assume people don't read before
replying in here.


-- 
Karthik
http://guilt.bafsoft.net

Re: delete deleted data

[L]

It was shareware/trialware and I am looking for the name of it... 
usually it is right on my Wiki when I make notes.. but I can't find it 
there yet.


L505



Kasper Revsbech wrote:

Are you willing to share the names of those programs ?

Kind regards
Kasper

L wrote:


One thing I found was that some undelete tools are not nearly as good 
as others.  I thought many of them used similar algorithms.. but some 
of them really worked much better and completely differently


L505

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Karthik Kumar]

On Jan 5, 2008 10:56 PM, Gilles Chehade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > > On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing
> > > non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to
> > > be documented for users to get their job done faster.
> > >
> >
> > If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> > putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'; You shouldn't be
> > fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather,
> > probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Then
> > you shouldn't be making a claim that 'OpenBSD supports openness'. If
> > you can manipulate your reasons for making this ethical, you shouldn't
> > be calling others names. And you shouldn't bring back ethics' dead
> > body around your neck.
> >
>
> You are talking about unrelated matters, and mixing our goals with the
> ones of your own community.
>

I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the
community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but
wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things
TM.

> OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object
> and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can
> buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright
> on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source
> for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from
> the sources on the cvs. That's it.
>

Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it
from the CVS.

> What you do with it is not of our matter and we do not prevent you from
> installing a proprietary software on top of it. This is your call, what
> you do with what we provide you is none of our business, as long as you
> do not remove the copyright notice.
>

My call: all lies and ego.

-- 
Karthik
http://guilt.bafsoft.net

Re: OT YAG Re: delete deleted data

[Shane J Pearson]

On 06/01/2008, at 1:57 AM, Diana Eichert wrote:


Any EE worth their weight in salt understands signal processing.  I  
do believe a lot of younger engineers have grown up in the 1 & 0  
digital world and forget about analog.


I think the first computers I witnessed in a work place, were actually  
analog computers (Navy).


Where a mix of humans, transistors, valves, gears and three-phase  
motors/sensors, got the job done.;-)



Shane

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Marco Peereboom]

That's clearly a rhetorical question.

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:30:36AM -0800, johan beisser wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008, at 6:31 AM, Richard Stallman wrote:
>> I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself.  To find out
>> the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to
>> check for me.
>
> Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get 
> reflected in what you say? You don't have someone else factcheck, or double 
> check these facts yourself?

Re: Richard Stallman...

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote:
> > > Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ?
> > > You are a troll.
> > 
> > Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or
> > I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell.
> >
> 
> You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that
> you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is
> different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF.

I'm not from the FSF.

> According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary
> system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it
> is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links
> to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system
> instead of switching to a proprietary one ?

1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't "links"
2) using more free software is better than not running it at all
3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating
   systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements
4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables
   running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as
   such de-incentivates the creation of replacements.
4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence.

> By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just
> a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while
> we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on
> top of a free system with free tools. 

Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who "need" such non-free
software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is
that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of
all users, you distribute non-free software.

> > Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I
> > shouldn't even "honour" you with a reply.
> 
> I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for
> helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just
> like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a
> person points at the flaws in your reasonning, grow up.

No, I am a victim and your (generically, not specifically you) attitude
actually makes my relation with OpenBSD very frustrating.

Rui

-- 
Wibble.
Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174
Celebrate Mungday
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[William Boshuck]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing
> > non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to
> > be documented for users to get their job done faster.
> >
> 
> If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'

The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free.  It is not
there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this
or that.

> ; You shouldn't be
> fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather,
> probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'.

Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts
in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the
OpenBSD developers are against blobs.  Theo, in particular, wrote
at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the
reasons.  You should look towards the beginning of the threads,
because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience
with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully
enough, or perhaps not at all).

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Karthik Kumar]

> Again this is for RMS.
> He does not fix the problem at his end. those are
>
> 1) Apologize for slandering other projects who don't come under his control.
> 2) Do Research to find out the truth
> 3) Be practical ( Demon+wget )
>
> And all he does is is complain.
>
> 1) I made a minor mistake.
> 2) Everything He says is OK.
> 3) rolling in the mud after falling down without trying to get up and be 
> clean.
> 4) Lament how Linux devs don't listen to him.
>
> and more...

When I said everybody, I meant Everybody. Not one person. Applying the
same to OpenBSD, all that the people here do is bitch about and
nothing more.

Re: [Fwd: Open-Hardware]

[Marco Peereboom]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 12:54:05AM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote:
> >  But I think the FPGAs in products are more like the possible computer
> >  in my microwave oven: nobody installs software in them, so they might
> >  as well be circuits.
> 
> Really?  All those wifi/raid/cpu/etc cards/chips out there that need
> "firmware", you think they're not a mix of both microcontroller code and
> other binary bits that configure an ASIC or FPGA?
> 
> I am not a hardware expert; I don't know sort of hardware the firmware
> blobs run on.  I will presume you're right.

He is right.  Hardware these days basically runs code.  You take several
cores and put together an ASIC that does specialized work.  For example
I know of an iSCSI vendor that took a processing core, an I2C core, a
UART core, a PCI bridge core (and some other minor ones) and made a nice
ASIC that runs iSCSI in hardware.  They even took a well known BSD
TCP/IP stack and converted it to pure hardware (thats code -> hardware).
Now if you have more than 1024 connections on that iSCSI core (which
incidentally also works a TCP Offload Engine aka TOE) then the
connections get offloaded to HBA/NIC code.  Now what was a pure hardware
device changes into a pure software device.  This is just one example
and there are many more beautifully blurred examples.  Your argument is
a fallacy with modern hardware.

> 
> Whether it runs on a computer or an FPGA, either way it's a program.
> So the next crucial question is, do users normally install programs on
> that device?  For some devices, the answer is no.  However, if the
> firmware is stored in a file on the disk, and the system downloads it
> into the device, the answer to that question is yes.

I am sure that at MIT they taught you that a finite sate machine can be
moved from hardware to software and vice versa.  All new hardware
whether it is a specialized ASIC or a general purpose cpu is deigned and
run in software first.  This is therefore obviously a pure software
function.  The reason why it is then later moved to silicon is for speed
and marketing purposes (yes, you know making money with development).
So you say that developing hardware is unethical until you have the
physical hardware?

And the reason is that software is cheap and hardware isn't?  I get paid
the same whether I am writing code or doing hardware (I do both for a
living).  So the company that I work for values the code that I write
roughly the same as the hardware that I "make".  Doesn't this therefore
value hardware roughly the same as software from a development cost
perspective?

Also modern CPUs run microcode.  Does this make them "unethical"?

I am sorry but I am completely lost as to what your philosophy is.
Could you please do me (and presumably this list) a big favor and
explain what ethics mean to you.  I really would like to understand how
writing software for a living measures up with lets say war or rape.

I also would like to understand a little bit better why hardware is
exempt from being unethical (make sure you explain ethics first so that
I can truly understand this).

Could you please respond to all paragraphs that I wrote?  I really want
to understand your thinking here.

Re: Real men don't attack straw men

[Gilles Chehade]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing
> > non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to
> > be documented for users to get their job done faster.
> >
> 
> If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'; You shouldn't be
> fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather,
> probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Then
> you shouldn't be making a claim that 'OpenBSD supports openness'. If
> you can manipulate your reasons for making this ethical, you shouldn't
> be calling others names. And you shouldn't bring back ethics' dead
> body around your neck.
> 

You are talking about unrelated matters, and mixing our goals with the
ones of your own community.

OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object
and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can
buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright
on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source
for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from
the sources on the cvs. That's it.

What you do with it is not of our matter and we do not prevent you from
installing a proprietary software on top of it. This is your call, what
you do with what we provide you is none of our business, as long as you
do not remove the copyright notice. 


> >
> > > On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of non-free
> > > software must come clean first: No clean, no talk.
> > >
> >
> > one who criticizes the other should come informed too.
> >
> 
> And the rest who do should avoid red herring arguments and accept what
> they are doing. In other words, they should say: 'I am wrong. I will
> fix the problem at my end. Your turn now.' I don't see anybody doing
> it. Don't you see how you're not doing anything but complaining? It
> doesn't make this any different.
> 

Please, show us what it is that we do and that goes against our goals
and license. Hint: carefully read the two following pages. 

http://www.openbsd.org/goals.html
http://www.openbsd.org/policy.html

-- 
Gilles Chehade