I am not subscribed to this list. Please CC if you need me to reply.
I was reading through the Terms Conditions[1] (henceforth Terms page) on the
and I am not sure that it conforms to the DFSG, specifically section 3. If
you look at the Terms page, you will notice that the section on Extending
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:35:10AM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
I am not subscribed to this list. Please CC if you need me to reply.
If you wish to be copied on replies to Debian lists, please set your
Mail-Followup-To header to indicate this, instead of asking everyone
else to adjust headers
On Monday 04 April 2005 04:12 am, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:35:10AM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
If you wish to be copied on replies to Debian lists, please set your
Mail-Followup-To header to indicate this, instead of asking everyone
else to adjust headers manually. :)
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you can find us a country whose laws make this illegal,
this issue would be worth discussing.
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 06:15:34PM +0200, Måns Rullgård wrote:
You are obviously convinced that using a command line interface can't
be protected by
Hello,
quick sumary
Current linux kernel source hold undistributable non-free firmware blobs, and
to consider them as mere agregation, a clear licence statement from the
copyright holders of said non-free firmware blobls is needed, read below for
details.
/quick sumary
Please keep everyone in
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 09:22:32PM -0400, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
I reject your attempt to make me decide without extra data.
What extra data do you need?
So far we've had apparently-expert opinions in both directions
about how this situation would be viewed by courts. I feel I
need
Sven Luther writes:
Hello,
quick sumary
Current linux kernel source hold undistributable non-free firmware blobs, and
to consider them as mere agregation, a clear licence statement from the
copyright holders of said non-free firmware blobls is needed, read below for
details.
/quick sumary
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:16:47PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
This is just the followup on said discussion, involving the larger LKML
audience, in order to get this fixed for good. As said, it is just a mere
technicality to get out of the muddy situation, all the people having
contributed
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:16:47PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
This is just the followup on said discussion, involving the larger LKML
audience, in order to get this fixed for good. As said, it is just a mere
technicality to get out of
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:16:47PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
This is just the followup on said discussion, involving the larger LKML
audience, in order to get this fixed for good. As said, it is just a mere
technicality to get out of
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
problem, or the ones discussing it.
Actually, there are some legitimate problems with some of the files in
the Linux source base. Last time this came up, the Acenic
On Apr 04, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
like they did with tg3 and others.
This sucks, yes.
--
ciao,
Marco (@debian.org)
signature.asc
On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 20:21 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
problem, or the ones discussing it.
[...]
All i am asking is that *the copyright holders* of said firmware
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:12:48PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 20:21 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
problem, or the ones discussing it.
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:05:18PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Apr 04, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
like they did with tg3 and others.
Their
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:05:18PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Apr 04, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
like they did with tg3 and others.
Nope,
On Apr 04, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
like they did with tg3 and others.
Nope, they were simply moved to non-free, as it should. I
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:05:18PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Apr 04, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
like they did with tg3 and others.
And
On Apr 04, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is waiting for NEW processing, but i also believe that the dubious
copyright assignement will not allow the ftp-masters to let it pass
into the archive, since it *IS* a GPL violation, and thus i am doing
this in order to solve that problem.
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
problem, or the ones discussing it.
Actually, there are some legitimate problems with some of the files in
the Linux source base. Last time this
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
Ian I think what Greg may have meant[0] was that if it bothers
Ian you, then you should act by contacting the copyright holders
Ian privately yourself in each case that you come across and
Ian asking them if you may add a little comment etc, and then
Ian submit patches once you
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:58:30PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:55:55PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
problem, or the ones discussing it.
Actually, there are some legitimate
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:35:10AM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
I was reading through the Terms Conditions[1] (henceforth Terms page)
on the and I am not sure that it conforms to the DFSG, specifically
section 3. If you look at the Terms page, you will notice that the
section on Extending and
Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:55:55PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
problem, or the ones discussing it.
Actually, there are some
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
Nope, i am aiming to clarify this issue with regard to the debian kernel, so
that we may be clear with ourselves, and actually ship something which is not
of dubious legal standing, and that we could get sued over for GPL violation.
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 11:05:03PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:23:08PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:58:30PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700,
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:55:27PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
Nope, i am aiming to clarify this issue with regard to the debian kernel, so
that we may be clear with ourselves, and actually ship something which is
not
of
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:23:08PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:58:30PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:47:36PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
Yep, but in the meantime, let's clearly mark said firmware as
not-covered-by-the-GPL. In the acenic case it seems to be even easier, as
the
firmware is in a separate acenic_firmware.h file, and it just needs to
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 11:24:05PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
It assuredly can't hurt to add a few lines of comments to tg3.c, and since it
is probably (well, 1/3 chance here) you who added said firmware to the tg3.c
file, i guess you are even well placed to at least exclude it from being
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 08:44:08 -0700 Josh Triplett wrote:
Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
* the acceptability of software and other content
Content? Which other content does Debian distribute besides
software? If, by software, you mean non-hardware (as it seems from
the rest of the
Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
Actually, if CC folk read software as programs and only programs,
they will look at
| This includes comparing software against the DFSG to determine if the
| packages are Free Software.
and say OK, you compare /software/ against the DFSG, but our licenses
are not
Francesco Poli wrote:
yep, sorry ;-)
Please, do not reply to me directly Cc:ing the list, as I didn't ask it.
Better reply to the list only, instead: I'm a subscriber and would
rather not receive replies twice.
Thanks.
[...]
On the contrary! :)
I think you should go on reading this useful
Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(-project added to the Cc:, non-debian related lists removed)
No documentation for the C compiler (not even a documentation of the
options) will be neither fun for the users of Debian nor for the Debian
maintainers - but it's the future of Debian...
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 03:29:26AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 07:42:36PM +0200, Andreas Bombe wrote:
In the case of gcc, it wasn't anything fuzzy. IIRC, libgcc is linked
statically into the executable to provide startup code etc. and it used
to be GPL. libgcc
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/04/msg00145.html
Can you summarize the conclusion of
Convert the keyspan USB serial driver to use request_firmware and
firmware_load_ihex.
Signed-off-by: Jan Harkes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux/drivers/usb/serial/keyspan.c
===
--- linux.orig/drivers/usb/serial/keyspan.c
Simple program to convert the keyspan firmware header files to IHEX
formatted files that can be loaded with hotplug.
This is really only needed once to convert the existing keyspan firmware
headers, which is what the next patch will do.
Signed-off-by: Jan Harkes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index:
Hello
I work for a major Japanese electronics company and we would like include Debian into one of our new products.
The trouble we are facing is that because Japan is one of the countries
in the wassenaar arrangement exports of cryptographic software count as
munitions and hence must be passed
On Monday 04 April 2005 23:23, Jan Harkes wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 12:23:29AM -0400, Jan Harkes wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005, Satoshi Kawase (Fukuoka) wrote:
I work for a major Japanese electronics company and we would like
include Debian into one of our new products.
Excellent.
While I've found lots of information regarding how to export Debian
outside the U.S. (
44 matches
Mail list logo
