Hi,
did something changed in the upload queue?:
$ dput *.changes
Uploading package to host ftp-master.debian.org
...
Good signature on /home/tillea/debian-maintain/sponsor/dosbox/dosbox_0.63-2.dsc.
Uploading via ftp dosbox_0.63-2.dsc: Error '553 Could not create file.' during
ftp transfer of
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 04:59:15PM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 11:34:55PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
Although the problem is well known and the solution is obvious, nobody seems
to have the guts to make a change (or even to speak about it).
Let's have a
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I don't know what the essense of Free Software is to you;
You do so. I created the DFSG. It defines what the essense of Free
Software is not only to me but to this project.
However, to me, the essense of Free Software is that it allows one to
modify the software
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 11:10:15PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
I've sent messages to various [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses many
times for various reasons, and they have all always been ignored.
Me too, for values of ignored that include may have resulted in some
action, but
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 07:50:16AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
$ dput *.changes
Uploading package to host ftp-master.debian.org
...
Good signature on
/home/tillea/debian-maintain/sponsor/dosbox/dosbox_0.63-2.dsc.
Uploading via ftp dosbox_0.63-2.dsc: Error '553 Could not create file.'
Michael K. Edwards wrote:
What part of "normally distributed ... with ... the operating system"
is confusing?
The license requires that the source code all of the pieces that
constitute a derivative work of some original piece of GPL code
must be provided. This would be the original GPL
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 11:10:15PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
I've sent messages to various [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses many
times for various reasons, and they have all always been ignored.
Me too, for values of ignored that include may have resulted in some
action, but
[Ingo Juergensmann]
Why? To make it public what buildd admins are the worst?
To make public the requests made regarding the autobuilders (others
can see existing requests, and do not have to send identical requests
again), and to make sure the state of each request is available both
to the
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Steve Langasek wrote:
See the dcut command (or the README file in UploadQueue) for information
on how to remove broken files from the ftp server.
I do not find the string dcut in
ftp://ftp-master.debian.org/pub/UploadQueue/README
but the *.commands file would probably help
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 08:51:52AM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Ingo Juergensmann]
Why? To make it public what buildd admins are the worst?
To make public the requests made regarding the autobuilders (others
can see existing requests, and do not have to send identical requests
again),
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 11:01:16PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
You never lose the right to modify. You lose the right to claim that a
modified version is the certified one. I addressed this specifically in
DFSG section 4:/
/
/The license may require derived works to carry a different
Op do, 16-12-2004 te 17:07 -0800, schreef Adam McKenna:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 01:13:11AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
I think Wouter is only asking for reciprocity here. If they don't care
about his concerns why should he care about theirs ? Or alternatively
not caring is a freedom.
We
On Dec 16, Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I refuse to accept that 'providing a common binary core' would be the
only way to fix the issue. It is probably the easiest way, and for lazy
people it may look as if it is the only one; but we should not dismiss
the idea that it is possible
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And now you consider it software just because the method of storage is
different? How can the nature of the bytes change because they are
stored on a disk?
The nature of the bytes do not change. But my name, distributed in a
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 09:53:51AM +0100, Peter Van Eynde wrote:
I'm stunned. So anything in a Debian package is software. With alien I can
convert a tar.gz into a debian package, so all tar files are software. With
tar I can create a tar.gz from any file, so all electronic data is software?
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Some firmware is part of the hardware. Some isn't. It's easy to tell
-- either it's in the hardware or it isn't. Of course, the name
firmware should make it clear that this is an often ambiguous line.
But this does seem to be a good practical place: can anybody with
Frank Lichtenheld [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The libunwind issue is newer, you
probably just have to read the corresponding bug reports.
Which bugs?
TIA, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 08:13:31PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
[quoting me, Frank]
Secondly, I'd like to learn what this libunwind is about and why
tetex-bin is linked against it on some (many!) arches, but not on
i386. The package description
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
I've sent messages to various [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses many
times for various reasons, and they have all always been ignored.
Me too, for values of ignored that include may have resulted in some
action, but never got a reply email.
Glenn Maynard wrote:
Hmm. A few places to draw the dependency from driver to firmware
line seem to be:
1: a dependency exists if the driver needs access to a copy of the firmware
(for devices that need the firmware uploaded on every boot);
2: a dependency exists if the hardware needs firmware at
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:03:00AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 11:01:16PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
You never lose the right to modify. You lose the right to claim that a
modified version is the certified one. I addressed this specifically in
DFSG section 4:/
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 10:51:39AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
When the issue of binary blobs in the kernel was first discussed here,
if I'm not mistaken the proposed solution was to rewrite the respective
drivers to be able to load the blob at runtime
Raul Miller wrote:
Fundamentally, the DFSG is aimed at making sure that we can provide the
software that we can support. Restrictions that leave us writing an
opaque blob of bits which drives an unknown API very much put us into
a context where we can't know that we're doing the right thing.
The
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 02:37:45AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, there's a very concrete reason: given an installation of Debian
main, the driver works. Drivers that require non-free firmware don't
work
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 02:37:09PM -0500, Ian Murdock wrote:
On Tue, 2004-12-14 at 18:15 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
This sounds a bit like the government whose country had three
different types of power plugs. None compatible, of course. Somebody
then got the great idea that if they
Matthew Palmer wrote:
Should I go on?
No, I think you've adequately demonstrated that you don't have the foggiest
idea what you're talking about.
Ok. I'm game. Why? Where is the error my in applying your rules?
Groetjes, Peter
hello,
Would you please tell me how can I get source code for OSPF and distance vector ? It would be of great help to me , if u can send me some address relatedto linux based systems and of socket programming type. Regardsj.s dhilip chandran
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner
hello,
Would you please told me how can I get source code for OSPF?Regardj.s dhilip chandran
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner
online.
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 09:21:03PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
This is a Linux program for writing Microsoft compatible boot records. The
program does the same as Microsoft fdisk /mbr to a hard disk or sys d:
to a floppy or FAT partition except that it does not copy any system files,
only
It has been suggested that you install symlinks[*] but provide an
/etc/default/foo file with an environment variable that forcibly
disables the service when set to off or whatever, and that the
initscript be written so that it overrides this forced disabling
when run from the command line. Of
On Dec 17, 2004 at 09:44, j.s.dhilip praised the llamas by saying:
hello,
Would you please told me how can I get source code for OSPF?
Makes a nice change from dualling banjos.
--
David Pashley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
* Andreas Tille ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041217 07:55]:
When trying manual ftp I found out that dosbox_0.63-2.dsc was put to master
but with zero bytes and I'm not allowed to remove this file.
The _only_ way to remove failed uploads is to upload a commands file,
e.g. with dcut.
Cheers,
Andi
--
John Goerzen wrote:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 10:43:37PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Thus, the answer to the failure of the LSB is not the Free Software
people should be more helpful to the non-free people; the correct
answer is the non-free people should be more helpful to the Free
Software
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:45:07AM +0100, Peter Van Eynde wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
Should I go on?
No, I think you've adequately demonstrated that you don't have the foggiest
idea what you're talking about.
Ok. I'm game. Why? Where is the error my in applying your rules?
Primary
Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
But what me *really* concerns is why dput and dupload failed in the
first place. Especially the hint to PASSIV MODE smells like something
has changed to the situation before.
[...]
| dput (0.9.2.15) unstable; urgency=low
|
| * More verbose
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 06:29:46PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 12:02:30AM +, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
If we refuse to handle non-free firmware being loaded onto devices and
require they come with it already inside then we get to play the I
can't see it, it
but something to point out: dbconfig-common already performs the
administrative actions needed to set up the database and database user
Well, see, the GnuMed bootstrapping does a lot more advanced
things regarding the database user. There's users and groups
with varying levels of access to the
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
But what me *really* concerns is why dput and dupload failed in the
first place. Especially the hint to PASSIV MODE smells like something
has changed to the situation before.
[...]
| dput (0.9.2.15) unstable; urgency=low
|
| * More verbose error
Op vr, 17-12-2004 te 01:40 -0800, schreef Steve Langasek:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:03:00AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Indeed; however, IMO excerting the right to modify as defined by the
DFSG should never result in the loss of support, or other negative
consequences, because in that
Sir/Madam,
I have Intel Mainboard 915GEV inbuilt Lan Card. Unable to install driver
for Debian Woody r3.0 ( 2.4.18 ). Please send a solution
regards
--
Soumen Biswas
Dept. of CSE,
College of Engg. Mgmt, Kolaghat
Ph: 03228-2331217,03228-233136
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Peter Van Eynde
| Architectural plans for a house, shipped in a Debian package, are
| software.
|
| I'm stunned. So anything in a Debian package is software. With alien I
| can convert a tar.gz into a debian package, so all tar files are
| software. With tar I can create a tar.gz from any
i maintained ms-sys until the 1.1.3, i knew about 2.0 but didn't do the
update. did you see some part of mbr code is
free and some not?
you probably want to talk to upstream, as i don't intend to maintain
ms-sys anymore (i don't want non-free stuff generally).
i was pointed to the package mbr in
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
Well, see, the GnuMed bootstrapping does a lot more advanced
things regarding the database user. There's users and groups
with varying levels of access to the database.
However, if dbconfig-common creates the admin account we just
use it. We can also
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Some firmware is part of the hardware. Some isn't. It's easy to tell
-- either it's in the hardware or it isn't. Of course, the name
firmware should make it clear that this is an often ambiguous line.
But this does seem
Quoting Andreas Tille ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
But what me *really* concerns is why dput and dupload failed in the
first place. Especially the hint to PASSIV MODE smells like something
has changed to the situation before. I do not know something about
passive mode but I'm afraid somebody has
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And now you consider it software just because the method of storage is
different? How can the nature of the bytes change because they are
stored on a disk?
The nature of the bytes do
* Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo
| * Package name: ms-sys
| Version : 2.0.0.
| Upstream Author : Henrik Carlqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| * URL : http://ms-sys.sourceforge.net/
| * License : GPL
| Description : tool for writing Microsoft compatible boot records
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please at least read Policy on what Depends means first. If you
also read the archives, you'll have a chance at understanding the
position of other debaters here, and of generating original
arguments. So far, this is all a repeat. It wasn't
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 01:56:43PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
| * Package name: ms-sys
| Version : 2.0.0.
| Upstream Author : Henrik Carlqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| * URL : http://ms-sys.sourceforge.net/
| * License : GPL
| Description : tool for
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 04:59:15PM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
As it stands, 4 downloads for s390 appear somewhat disproportionate to
1,285,422 for i386.
s390 is a little special, because it's neither a desktop nor a server
architecture, but rather a mainframe one. One software installation
Raul Miller wrote:
Fundamentally, the DFSG is aimed at making sure that we can provide the
software that we can support. Restrictions that leave us writing an
opaque blob of bits which drives an unknown API very much put us into
a context where we can't know that we're doing the right
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is your name input for a state-machine?
You should see what it does to TECO. My name is a killing word.
:-)
[data == software ?]
Bingo. Debian had this debate last year. There was a giant vote over
it. Then another debate
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 11:10:15PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
I've sent messages to various [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses many
times for various reasons, and they have all always been ignored.
Me too, for values of ignored that
Raul Miller wrote:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:39:26AM +0100, Peter Van Eynde wrote:
The API is known, otherwise there would be no Linux driver.
The API that is programmed by the firmware -- which you shouldn't confuse
with the API used by the driver that downloads the firmware -- is not
known to
On Wednesday 15 of December 2004 21:05, you wrote:
I saw that you also ITP a OSSP (www.ossp.org) project for Debian:
OSSP uuid. I intent to do the same for OSSP sa. I'm using the sa
library successful for a small application so my intention is
make it public for others who intent to do the
Raul Miller wrote:
The API that is programmed by the firmware -- which you shouldn't confuse
with the API used by the driver that downloads the firmware -- is not
known to us.
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 03:51:22PM +0100, Peter Van Eynde wrote:
I don't understand you.
Hmm...
An API is not
Why this library was suddenly deemed critical for the architecture after
we were already 3 months into a toolchain freeze is another question.
This I'd like to know, too
FWIW, these questions seem more appropriate to debian-devel than
debian-mentors; these are not what I would call
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:33:41AM -0500, I clumsily wrote:
I was talking about the API the firmware uses -- the one that the program
contained in the API was designed to work with.
That should have read:
I was talking about the API the firmware uses -- the one that the program
contained in
if [ $variant == Unicode ]; then
That is a bashism which will fail if /bin/sh is dash. Use
[ foo = bar ] instead.
Thanks... are there any more pitfalls like this?
[ expr -a expr ] is a pretty common mistake.
[ expr ] [ expr ] should be used instead.
(The same with OR.)
*/ Christoffer
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Indeed; however, IMO excerting the right to modify as defined by the
DFSG should never result in the loss of support, or other negative
consequences, because in that case you might as well not have it. This
type of certification does carry that kind of negative consequence.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: pngwriter
Version : 0.5.0
Upstream Author : Paul Blackburn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://pngwriter.sourceforge.net
* License : GPL
Description : Library for plotting PNG image pixel by pixel
PNGwriter
[didn't sent to the list...]
Andreas Tille wrote:
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
first place. Especially the hint to PASSIV MODE smells like
something
has changed to the situation before.
| dput (0.9.2.15) unstable; urgency=low
Perhaps this was the reason but I should probably
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:05:00AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Op do, 16-12-2004 te 17:07 -0800, schreef Adam McKenna:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 01:13:11AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
I think Wouter is only asking for reciprocity here. If they don't care
about his concerns why should he
On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 15:34 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
Is that the majority or the minority of applications?
Take for example a web application like a forum. It requires the
password so it can connect to the database. It can't/won't ask the
Hello all, I've been mostly out of commission for a while, and my key
isn't currently in the keyring. I've been working with Jaqque to get it
in, but we haven't finished that yet.
But, I've had some requests for a new limewire package, and so I've
made one. My problem is that I don't have
Hopefully this continues to be interesting to debian-devel readers.
Perhaps replies should go to debian-legal; GMail doesn't seem to let
me set Followup-To, but feel free to do so if you think best.
I have copied Eben Moglen (General Counsel to the FSF) at Bruce's
suggestion. Mr. Moglen, I am
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Architectural plans for a house, shipped in a Debian package, are
software.
I'm stunned. So anything in a Debian package is software. With alien I
can convert a tar.gz into
On re-reading the sequence of events, it looks like I was the one who
switched the context of the hypothetical reproducible build tools
obligation from GPL to LGPL. Bruce, my apologies for implying that
you were the one who switched contexts. So we seem to agree that the
support for this
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 11:07:31AM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
No, a definition of software was never decided upon. The vote was
about removing the word software in certain places from the DFSG,
regardless of its definition.
However, the S in DFSG means software; the SC was adjusted to say
Hi Peter,
In fact I've already done that. The *.h goes to /usr/include/ossp/ and
library
name is libossp-uuid.so. There is no problem with names as far as I've
modified /usr/bin/uuid-config.
Ok. I did not upload my packages until now. I will change the library and
package name to
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 03:23:54PM +0100, Peter Van Eynde wrote:
Hmm. I remember we had an editorial change that then turned into
something completely different, followed by 6 damage limitation options and
1 hard line option. A damage limitation option won, but I if I read the
matrix
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 09:39:46AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 02:37:45AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, there's a very concrete reason: given an installation of Debian
main,
Michael K. Edwards wrote:
Hopefully this continues to be interesting to debian-devel readers.
It's not even interesting to me, and I hope that someone of greater
legal competence sets you right and ends the discussion.
The LGPL requires that the creator of a derivative work provide
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 12:26:01 -0800, Bruce Perens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The LGPL requires that the creator of a derivative work provide the object
code for relinking, and not prohibit relinking and reverse engineering. It
does not, however, require that creator to take other necessary steps
Do you want a working XFree86 configuration out of the box, without
having to answer questions about your hardware?
Try to install xdebconfigurator,
URL:http://packages.debian.org/xdebconfigurator, and see if it work
for you? To test it, install the package and run
xdebconfigurator dexconf
So, I did this a few days ago, and ddcprobe was not in any Debian
package. Also, it got the mouse as /dev/input rather than
/dev/input/mouse, and the resulting X configuration didn't work. It
would be really nice if it worked.
Thanks
Bruce
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Do you want a working
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
Is that really JPEG? Or JTAG?
That's all we need, lossy ROM image compression :-) Yes, JTAG.
Thanks
Bruce
Peter Van Eynde wrote:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[data == software ?]
Bingo. Debian had this debate last year. There was a giant vote over
it. Then another debate and another vote.
Hmm. I remember we had an editorial change that then turned
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 22:30:02 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Try to install xdebconfigurator,
URL:http://packages.debian.org/xdebconfigurator, and see if it work
for you? To test it, install the package and run
xdebconfigurator dexconf
This will replace your
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: kbandwidth
Version : 1.0.1
Upstream Author : Niko Sommer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=18939
* License : GPL
Description : Network interface monitor in KDE tray
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 11:07:31AM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
No, a definition of software was never decided upon. The vote was
about removing the word software in certain places from the DFSG,
regardless of its definition.
However, the S in DFSG
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 11:36:09PM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote:
To me, that seems much like arguing that because an emulator (such as
one for a console system) provides a GUI, and because it can run and
display that GUI without needing a ROM, the emulator should go to main.
I don't believe
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:49:13 +0100, Thomas Hood wrote:
[...]
The idea behind
initscripts is that they do what they are told when they are run.
sysv-rc and file-rc implement two different schemes for
determining when they are run and with what arguments. I don't
see why people keep trying to
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 09:53:51 +0100, Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And now you consider it software just because the method of
storage is different? How can the nature of the bytes change
because they are stored
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 14:52:56 -0800, Brian Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 11:07:31AM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
No, a definition of software was never decided upon. The vote
was about removing the word software in certain places
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:23:54 +0100, Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is your name input for a state-machine?
You should see what it does to TECO. My name is a killing word.
:-)
[data == software ?]
Bingo.
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 11:36:09PM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote:
To me, that seems much like arguing that because an emulator (such as
one for a console system) provides a GUI, and because it can run and
display that GUI without needing a ROM, the
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:51:54 -0800, Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 09:25:38PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Op do, 16-12-2004 te 14:46 -0500, schreef Ian Murdock:
We've heard directly from the biggest ISVs that nothing short of
a common binary core will be
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:45:15 -0800, Bruce Perens [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
1. (*) text/plain ( ) text/html
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
'ISV' is just another name for 'Software Hoarder'.
Please keep in mind this portion of Debian's Social Contract:
/We will support our users who develop
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 01:28:46AM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote:
I'm convinced enough. Some time ago, I was playing around with an
emulator for Texas Instruments calculators. It obviously required a
ROM image to be useful, and the only legal way of obtaining one was
dumping it from your
I'll try to address the Specht case and summarize, and we can call
this an end to the discussion if that's what you want.
Bruce You can read a case on the nature of consent such as Specht v. Netscape,
Bruce which might convince you that we don't necessarily get
sufficient consent on
Bruce the
Peter Van Eynde [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think I'm starting to understand your point of view. So _any_ use of
the software without using non-DFSG data makes it free, right?
Any reasonable use. Printing out a firmware not found message
doesn't count!
But what if loading the firmware is
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 01:28:46AM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote:
I'm convinced enough. Some time ago, I was playing around with an
emulator for Texas Instruments calculators. It obviously required a
ROM image to be useful, and the only legal way of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 20:04:01 -0500
Source: preseed
Binary: file-preseed initrd-preseed network-preseed preseed-common
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.02
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:09:54 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6
Binary: nic-modules-2.6.8-1-sparc32-di xfs-modules-2.6.8-1-sparc32-di
ext3-modules-2.6.8-1-sparc32-di md-modules-2.6.8-1-sparc64-di
ipv6-modules-2.6.8-1-sparc64-di
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 18:09:05 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-di-sparc
Binary: reiserfs-modules-2.4.27-1-sparc64-di
scsi-core-modules-2.4.27-1-sparc64-di usb-modules-2.4.27-1-sparc64-di
firmware-modules-2.4.27-1-sparc64-di
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 11:08:35 +0100
Source: localechooser
Binary: localechooser
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.01
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Christian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 01:10:59 -0500
Source: gst-editor
Binary: gstreamer-editor
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.8.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: David I. Lehn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: David I. Lehn [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:00:08 +0100
Source: dosbox
Binary: dosbox
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.63-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Peter Veenstra [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Peter Veenstra [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:07:29 +
Source: ganglia-monitor-core
Binary: ganglia-monitor libganglia1-dev libganglia1 gmetad
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.7-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Stuart Teasdale [EMAIL
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
