Brian Thomas Sniffen writes:
> Michael Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Brian Thomas Sniffen writes:
> >
> >> Måns Rullgård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> >
> >> > You can pull the chip from the socket, copy the contents to disk,
> >> > and
> >>
> >> I probably can't. No good with that
Michael Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Brian Thomas Sniffen writes:
>
>> Måns Rullgård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > You can pull the chip from the socket, copy the contents to disk,
>> > and
>>
>> I probably can't. No good with that sort of thing. Software on disk
>> is software.
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 11:44:54AM -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>
> > On Dec 28, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 04:26:26PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> >> > Yet the ICQ client is not useful without a compon
[let's see if I can keep from screwing up the formatting on this one.]
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 04:26:59PM -0800, Ken Arromdee wrote:
> I think the scenario "They moved the firmware from a chip to a CD, so we
> can't distribute a driver any more" is ridiculous. Any attempt to modify
> the rules to
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 11:46:19PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > It
may be helpful to think of your hard drive as a computer. At that >
point, the firmware is clearly software for the hard drive - it's a
> string of bytes that is executed. The rest of the hard drive is >
hardware. If something is
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> > But that's a strange reason to require that the firmware blob on CD be free.
> > It's essentially saying "if you can make it hard to modify the firmware,
> > you don't need to allow modifications at all".
> As always, intent matters.
But most pe
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:58:58 -0600 Adam Majer wrote:
> This is backwards. If we have,
>
> A - GPL
> B - LGPL
> C - LGPL
> D - BSD, non-free, LGPL or whatever
>
> The above states that A cannot link with B, which is not what I meant.
Right. A *can* indeed link with B.
> I meant that,
>
> A lin
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> I probably can't. No good with that sort of thing. Software on disk
> is software. Also, I could pull the Pentium off my motherboard, scan
> its contents to disk, and open that in any editor I like -- right?
So if a BIOS can be scanned by a pr
Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Måns Rullgård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> You can pull the chip from the socket, copy the contents to disk,
>> and
>
> I probably can't. No good with that sort of thing. Software on disk
> is software. Also, I could pull the Pentium off my m
Brian Thomas Sniffen writes:
> Måns Rullgård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > You can pull the chip from the socket, copy the contents to disk,
> > and
>
> I probably can't. No good with that sort of thing. Software on disk
> is software. Also, I could pull the Pentium off my motherboard, s
Måns Rullgård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>> Can a company release an encrypted CD, so that it's as difficult to
>>> modify the firmware on CD as it is in a chip, and then have it
>>> count as part of the hardware?
>>
>> No, that's not hardware
Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Can a company release an encrypted CD, so that it's as difficult to
>> modify the firmware on CD as it is in a chip, and then have it
>> count as part of the hardware?
>
> No, that's not hardware. That's an encrypted CD. That, and the DRM
> app
Helen Faulkner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Some software in this archive may be from the book Methods and Programs
>for Mathematical Functions (Prentice-Hall, 1989) or from the Cephes
>Mathematical Library, a commercial product. In either event, it is
>copyrighted by the author.
Ken Arromdee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> * The firmware blob on CD, if free, can be easily modified by end
>> users. It's just software. Even given the preferred form for
>> modification, it's much more difficult to re-flash a firmware chip
>> on hardware not designed for regular firmwa
Hi,
Please CC replies to me, because I'm not on the list.
I noticed a problem with the license of the cephes library, which is
included in the Debian packages labplot (maintained by me) and grace
(maintained by Torsten Werner), and possibly others. At least
python2.2-scipy and python2.3-scip
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 04:58:52PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> to support this. The obvious thing to do here is not to attempt to find
>> a way that we can interpret the SC that makes sense - the obvious thing
>> to do here is to decide what we want the
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> That said, or not, I do think there's a significant practical
> difference between firmware which ships as software, say on a CD
> accompanying the device, and firmware which ships on the device:
>
> * The firmware on the CD is typically not redis
Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I don't believe policy or the SC does expand on what "requires"
>> means. This is the only self-consistent explanation I've seen which
>> allows Debian to ship a usable OS. Have you another?
>
> Th
I'll ask debian-legal. I have a pretty good idea that LGPL is ok for
source, but binary would be GPL due to MySQL client, but I'll ask anyway.
This is a question about possible license combinations. More
specifically, can a more freely licensed software than GPL use a GPL
library.
>>It states tha
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 04:58:52PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> to support this. The obvious thing to do here is not to attempt to find
> a way that we can interpret the SC that makes sense - the obvious thing
> to do here is to decide what we want the SC to say and then change it so
Fundamenta
Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't believe policy or the SC does expand on what "requires"
> means. This is the only self-consistent explanation I've seen which
> allows Debian to ship a usable OS. Have you another?
The parsimonious explanation is that the issue wasn't th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Dec 25, Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > Yet, CF is actually chips --- often the same chips as used to hold
>> > firmware distributed with hardware. Thus, it's all hardware.
>> Sure. It's on a medium for software exchange, thus i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Dec 28, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 04:26:26PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> > Yet the ICQ client is not useful without a component which is not in
>> > Debian and in fact is not freely available.
>> Same thing
On Dec 28, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 04:26:26PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > Yet the ICQ client is not useful without a component which is not in
> > Debian and in fact is not freely available.
> Same thing applies to hardware drivers. And, for that matt
On Dec 25, Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yet, CF is actually chips --- often the same chips as used to hold
> > firmware distributed with hardware. Thus, it's all hardware.
> Sure. It's on a medium for software exchange, thus it's software. If
> it were an integral componen
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 04:26:26PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> Yet the ICQ client is not useful without a component which is not in
> Debian and in fact is not freely available.
Nor is a driver useful without a piece of hardware which isn't in
Debian.
Of course, license permitting, Debian *cou
26 matches
Mail list logo