Hello.
I have a question about licences.
I have just read in FAQ question that SL has a GPL license. Do anybody
know witch version of license is? 1, 2 or 3?
Regards
Miguel.
Confidencialidad:
Este mensaje y sus ficheros adjuntos se dirige exclusivamente a su desti
Hi,
Am 12.05.2011 12:09, schrieb Miguel Angel Diaz:
> I have a question about licences.
>
> I have just read in FAQ question that SL has a GPL license. Do anybody
> know witch version of license is? 1, 2 or 3?
I think this is depending on which package you are asking for. The Linux
Kernel itself
For each package there is a license, but it should exist a license for
SL.
For example, in Centos you can find a file (GPU.txt or EULA.txt) in a
mirror http://centos.arcticnetwork.ca/5.5/os/x86_64/ . These files show
version of GPL license.
Did anyone find these files to SL ?
El jue, 12-05-201
> I have a question about licences.
> >
> > I have just read in FAQ question that SL has a GPL license. Do anybody
> > know witch version of license is? 1, 2 or 3?
>
> I think this is depending on which package you are asking for. The Linux
> Kernel itself e.g. is GPLv2 only.
Indeed, if you query
Am 12.05.2011 13:53, schrieb Miguel Angel Diaz:
> For each package there is a license, but it should exist a license for
> SL.
>
> For example, in Centos you can find a file (GPU.txt or EULA.txt) in a
> mirror http://centos.arcticnetwork.ca/5.5/os/x86_64/ . These files show
> version of GPL lice
Hi.
I agree with you that packages have their own licenses.
But my question follows in other way. Imagine I want to create
other .iso based on S.L.iso. I need to read .iso license to know if I am
doing well.
Regards.
El jue, 12-05-2011 a las 14:32 +0200, Frank Lanitz escribió:
> Am 12.05.20
Look at "Legal Questions about Scientific Linux" FAQ:
https://www.scientificlinux.org/documentation/faq/legal
12/05/2011 16:20 +0200, Miguel Angel Diaz wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I agree with you that packages have their own licenses.
>
> But my question follows in other way. Imagine I want to create
>
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 08:20, Miguel Angel Diaz
wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I agree with you that packages have their own licenses.
>
> But my question follows in other way. Imagine I want to create
> other .iso based on S.L.iso. I need to read .iso license to know if I am
> doing well.
>
> Regards.
>
>
Ok
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:39 PM, john h outlan wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:31 PM, curriegrad2004 > wrote:
>
>> Can you link to the forums so we can all discuss stuff on there. It
>> would also be nice if somebody created a #sl channel on freenode too
>> ;)
>>
>>
>>
> Hithe
You have performed a great service setting up the forum. It has been quite
helpful for a lot of people, and long overdue.
Your comments on CentOS are exactly correct. I think very few people
actually take much pleasure in the events there, since CentOS has been a
great service to the community f
I'm just trying out openafs on SL6 and ran into the following starting the afs
daemon:
Starting AFS client.
afsd: some file missing or bad in /usr/vice/etc
Running in permissive mode it worked and the following denials were logged:
type=AVC msg=audit(1305234031.892:15130): avc: denied {
On 05/12/2011 03:04 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
I'm just trying out openafs on SL6 and ran into the following starting the afs
daemon:
Starting AFS client.
afsd: some file missing or bad in /usr/vice/etc
Turns out this was caused by following the quick start guide and linking
/usr/afs/etc/
On 05/12/2011 03:17 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
On 05/12/2011 03:04 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
I'm just trying out openafs on SL6 and ran into the following starting the afs
daemon:
Starting AFS client.
afsd: some file missing or bad in /usr/vice/etc
Turns out this was caused by following
Ever since with the disapperance of a key dev who held half the
pillars of CentOS, it's not surprising that it happens to end like
this. At least the SL effort is backed by a few research labs funded
by a government (which hopefully, will sustain for quite some time)
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:00 P
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:41 PM, curriegrad2004 wrote:
> Ever since with the disapperance of a key dev who held half the
> pillars of CentOS, it's not surprising that it happens to end like
> this. At least the SL effort is backed by a few research labs funded
> by a government (which hopefully, w
Hi,
This is a two-part question: Firstly, has anyone worked with any of
the USB over IP devices in a Linux environment? Secondly, if so, has
anyone had any experience developing software to communicate with
these devices.
I'm looking at trying to control variou
SL got mentioned here:
http://blog.2ndquadrant.com/en/2011/05/the-rise-and-fall-of-centos.html
"Well, that party is over. Last week Dag publicly announced he was resigning
from CentOS development work, seemingly over development team communication
issues. In the comments there, Dag specifical
17 matches
Mail list logo
