tegskywal...@hotmail.com wrote ..
If search doesn't have some centralization, then how will it work?
Go read up on YaCy, although I'm sure that's not the only way to do it.
I personally don't expect anyone working on Ubuntu or Canonical to
package the free firmware. They already have the non-free one
packaged. Since freedom isn't their priority, I don't expect them to
undertake the work to package the free one (especially with the
non-standard build system you refer
Ah, yes - I've done it.
I may
switch to it if they fix the licensing issue with their typeface and
offer to
remove the binary blobs from the kernel.
Heh; you won't be switching then. :)
P.S. In the past, Jason brought over the 3.5 kernel to Trisquel 6
from the
lts-quantal package, but are there plans as well to bring over the
3.8 kernel
from the lts-raring package?
Yes, I do plan to work on 3.8 when I get some free time to do so.
Would the layout fall apart if a regular hyphens were used instead?
It does, with the package name being split into multiple lines along
the hyphens. I may look into other options at some point.
Indeed, I've found that some people still add a deb-src line for some
reason, even though the instruction at jxself.org/linux-libre don't
mention doing that. Hopefully kokomo_joe can confirm if that's what
they did.
They accept patches; loading such firmware without recommending it to
users is a missing feature of a very low priority.
(This is completely unrelated to PCI cards supported by ath9k, since
they don't use loadable firmware.)
Indeed. This whole thing seems that it's simply the original
Nevertheless, if I'm stated in a position to make a decision btw. a
90% free
software, or a 100% pure proprietary BIOS, I'll rather choose the
prior.
Of course that's better but this doesn't mean settling for that. What
we should be going for is 100% free, and that can be achieved by using
What you raise a technical issues, and some of it seems to be a
distraction: 3D acceleration, for example, is generally problematic no
matter where you look, although that's improving, but really that's an
orthogonal issue to the BIOS.
The free software movement's not about technical things, and
You wanna tell me that using a proprietary BIOS is better than using
Coreboot?
That's not what I'm saying. Sure, maybe there's less proprietary
software with Coreboot installed but since Coreboot has adopted
proprietary software to support these, proprietary software's still
there either way.
It could even be used to make your own version of Secure Boot.
At this point it begins acting as an agent *for* you, rather than
*against* you, so there's no need to fear it.
aaz...@mail.ru wrote ..
Lets be patient, this is only draft.
Exactly, and beware the FUD. What's being discussed here are patents,
which is a different issue from copyright. The way copyright restricts
you, via copyright law and the software license, is completely
different from the way patents
aaz...@mail.ru wrote ..
1. jxself, are you trying to contact with Stephen Chung?
Maybe we can convince him to change the license
I have not. Please feel free to do so.
2.As stated in the Debian bug it's in the source code for windoze
only
however, so the binary is clean
Is that true?
Whenever someone says they have to use proprietary software I am
immediately suspect.
This is a good read, I think:
http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2010/08/09/have-to-use.html
TL;DR version: What they really mean is that they want to use
proprietary software, not that they have to.
Helpful for
You're right, it's important to use the correct term which is
Gnu/Linux, but
I have to admit this name is kind of impractical. Especially because
you
sometimes have to use the word more often in one phrase.
This:
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#long
And the 3 or 4 right below
In such the case, unlocking is fraud. You will get freedom and a
discount,
and the provider will get nothing.
Please don't believe the propaganda that it's about the discount. In
the U.S. you're typically required to agree to keep the service for
one or two years with the carrier getting
So you don't mind that the media companies go after unauthorized copying
You sure are into reading stuff that's not there.
You had tried to make the claim that this comic strip tried to convey
the idea of no penalties. From reading a comic strip you somehow came
to the conclusion that it was
I'm familiar with Mimi Eunice and the same reply still applies - No
one's making the argument that there should be no penalties.
I'd argue against that like this: suppose I owned a zoo. I charge
admission
for all those who want to enter. You sneak in through a hole in the
fence,
enjoy a day at the zoo, and sneak out. By that argument, I should not
prosecute or go after you, because I still have the zoo.
Wait --
ejectm...@me.com wrote ..
@jxself You're missing the point.
Not at all. I was trying to point out how silly your analogy was. If
you want to call it unauthorized entry, that's fine by me but saying
that they've somehow stolen the zoo merely by their entering it
without authorization is beyond
Trisquel doesn't have version 4 in the repositories so the package
manager won't show it to you. Most GNU/Linux distros don't have the
latest bleeding edge versions of stuff but rather well tested versions
that are properly configured and integrated with the rest of the distro.
The ath9k_htc driver has been included in the mainline Linux kernel
since version 2.6.35 so having a new enough kernel really isn't the issue.
The real issue is finding a kernel that hasn't blacklisted loading the
firmware, since it used to be proprietary. Which will do that? Well,
none of mine
I'd argue that people aren't required to do software development as
their sole occupation anyway and that even if they try no one is
guaranteed any particular result: What if you start a company making
proprietary software and it's a complete flop? Free software doesn't
change that risk but I
ejectm...@me.com wrote ..
I am not referring to if you are the developer. You should
absolutely be able
profit from your own work. But why must you also give others the
freedom to
profit from your work, or the freedom to strip your profits away by
distributing the work without charge? If
Quiliro Ordóñez asked:
That is a fine list. Would it be possible to use this list to check a
running kernel for the use of these files in order to tell the users
they have non free software running on their systems?
Probably but it seems to me that there are two problems:
1. A distribution
You also need to tell someone if you want to be added to the official
mirror list. See https://trisquel.info/en/contact
I use MythTV.
Fabian Rodriguez said:
Although the resulting files required proprietary codecs to play (at
least ATSC raw datain NorthAmerica does), Trisquel itself doesn't
require any non-free codecs to record the streams.
There are free software programs to play MPEG-2 video and AC-3 audio
(the codecs used
danieldelaho...@gmail.com wrote ..
Inyeresting thanks for the comments. It's a shame its not free
software.
Distributed peer-to-peer file syncing sounds like a good idea.
Indeed, so go make a free implementation of it. :)
Where's the source code? After a quick search I couldn't find it. A
program without source code is automatically not okay.
aliasb...@gmail.com wrote ..
At least the app seems to be okay :
https://github.com/bittorrenttorque/btapp
I saw that - It claims to be BitTorrent's Torque powered javascript
library, bringing torrent technology to the browser - Not BitTorent
Sync. I can't seem to find the source code for
I don't think the comparison to a microwave oven or being a circuit
really applies here.
* The microwave doesn't come with a slot to insert and run new or
different programs into it.
* The circuit analogy doesn't hold up either, since the user can
change the operation just by inserting a new or
Quiliro Ordóñez asked:
I like it. How would you with low end computers (like the one I sue now:
Celeron D) Which take a lot of time to compile but not su much to run
programs?
This is why distros provide precompiled programs for people to use:
There's a convenience there, but I still agree
I can't make my own game and run it.
Oh? Why not? You should check out the homebrew community - People do
indeed make games for these ancient consoles.
Such a compiler could also exist in the free world - Having access to
the source code for the compiler is not a defense. See this for the
reason why:
http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/B/back-door.html
If your laptop uses whitelisting (and I don't know if it does or not)
then there is no guarantee. If it does have a whitelist it probably
does it based on PCI ID, or at least that's how the ThinkPad does it.
What do you mean when it's not recognized? What happens? If you put
in such a card to do
they aren't really a computer
It's not?
It has a CPU, RAM, user-loadable software programs, etc..
Consider that people even hack on games make new ones and modified
versions.
Even the old Atari 2600 has new titles coming out each year.
I don't think that they have any malicious features.
Quiliro Ordóñez asked:
What did you look for in order to know it was the same chipset?
You mentioned your current WiFi card was AR242x. So's this one. If
you'll noticed, under Supported Chips, the AR242 series are all
supported by the the ath5k driver:
Are there any plans to add Mate to the repositories?
Are you offering to take on maintaining it?
superbyel...@yahoo.com wrote ..
I was curious. Mozilla Firefox is not considered free
software because
it has some proprietary things concerning logos, correct?
I would assume this was true also for Mozilla Seamonkey? I am
asking because
frankly I despise Firefox-type browsers. I
If you're interested in taking on the role maintaining it one thing to
do would be to make a Helper for the package in question. That's a start.
https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/package-helpers
Try the main server?
What version of Trisquel are you using?
Of course, and yes to both although it will certainly be
multigenerational like all social movements.
Is that possible in case of Trisquel?
Sure why not? If you examine software respositories you should find
common things because Trisquel comes from Ubuntu which comes from --
wait for it -- Debian.
charles_le...@hotmail.com wrote ..
I recently watched a video in which Dr. Richard Stallman gave a
lecture about
the importance of using free and open source software.
I very much doubt that :) He would have given a talk about the
importance of free software, not about the importance of open
1: Cam to Cam chat. Flash has the ability to do online chatting with
people; audio and video. I have yet to see a Flash Alternative that
can also
interact with these sites. Could something like this be built with
Free
Software Java?
Look at WebRTC for just one example. The better way
I imagine the problem lies within cube_unix, not BASH. In most cases
your home directory is not within your $PATH. So it seems to me that
there are two options:
* Update cube_unix so that it uses the exact path to linux_client
* Add /home/julian/cube/bin_unix/ to your $PATH
Anyone can work on maintaining a Helper:
http://trisquel.info/en/wiki/package-helpers
Once you've made a Helper for your package sent a patch to the
trisquel-devel mailing list where it will be reviewed and feedback
provided or added:
http://listas.trisquel.info/mailman/listinfo/trisquel-devel
When will it be official released show up in the download page?
That is supposed to happen on Friday March 1 or Saturday March 2
depending on what time zone you're in when it happens.
I would not reject it, since it's still free software regardless of
what the author called it. The author might call it open source
because they reject the social, ethical and political underpinnings
of the free software movement and instead think software should be
free because of technical
What's the point of installing a 100% free GNU+Linux distribution if
the first step is adding proprietary software back in?
Anyway, I think we need more details like the output of various logs
and whatnot so that we can know what's happening (or not happening.)
The obvious thing to try is a kernel update to the latest version of
Linux-libre.
Assuming that this is the cause. Without the logs, we don't know.
A newer kernel can be obtained from http://jxself.org/linux-libre
There's been no communication from Qualcomm Atheros about this. It
could happen tomorrow. It could happen eight months from now.
Think about this scenario in the world for which the FSF strives:
you find
that somebody's created a really nice program, but the developer is
charging
a large sum for it. You simply search for one of the millions of
mirrors that
have sprung up to redistribute software, and download the
So compiling a modified version is trivial without branding.
Indeed, but to quote Brett:
Unfortunately, such a restriction in a trademark license does make the
software nonfree. As we've said in the past, a requirement that you
rename the software when you modify it is fine -- but a
I've heard others advocate a similar strategy involving a multi-step
strategy of moving people to free software. The problem I find with
this is that everyone then spends all of their time on step one (being
more free than they were in step zero) and no one moves on to step two
(fully free.) We
This is an appropriate use of the trademark
Actually, Mozilla's trademark policy goes too far:
http://jxself.org/mozilla_trademark.shtml
a...@member.fsf.org wrote ..
Where is the final RC? I thought quidam said it would be released
today...
But he didn't say what time zone that would be -- And there are still
(roughly) 14 hours left somewhere in the world where it's still
considered to be February 8.
That does seem odd indeed. Which binary blobs do the copyright holders
state are under the GPL?
Check out the kernel source code - It's all there.
Bob Ham:
What you're saying doesn't make sense.
You should check out the kernel named Linux, then -- It contains
binary blobs which the copyright holder states are licensed under the
GPL, but no source code is available for them from anywhere. That
doesn't make the license notice invalid though.
It doesn't say if he plans for Sonar to be 100% free though.
I inquired about funding the same work in Debian or Trisquel
Yeah, since he used to help with accessibility in Trisquel, why not
continue doing that? It seems a waste to duplicate effort maintaining
yet another distribution, especially if he was already helping with
accessibility in Trisquel to
onp...@gmail.com wrote ..
The copyright holder doesn't have to distribute the work under the
terms of
the license because he/she/it already has complete permission to
distribute
it in any way he/she/it wants under copyright.
Actually, I'm not entirely sure, but I think that if software is
tegskywal...@hotmail.com wrote ..
I am wondering if it worth installing.
If you have need to access exFAT formatted drives, then I'd say yes.
Not true.
I must disagree.
also note III.3: You are not obligated to comply with Subsection
III.1.d if Your Product is not distributed (i.e., Your
Product is available only to You).
That section is irrelevant to the point I'm discussing because I'm
discussing situations where the program
I don't know how RMS does it.
It probably helps that he has a full-time assistance to manage
everything:
[0] Jeanne Rasata, Assistant to the President -
http://www.fsf.org/about/staff-and-board
davidvarg...@mac.com asked:
Would you agree with me?
No, and stop trolling.
ejectm...@me.com wrote ..
...or whatever it's called on Linux systems...
GNU/Linux: http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html
Could anyone else patent my idea/technology?
Indeed they could, especially in countries that follow the First To
File policy (like the United States), rather than First To Invent.
In fact, because the patent system in the U.S. is just so absolutely
broken it's even possible for multiple people
Ha; if prior art actually worked then the avalanche of patents coming
out of the U.S. Patent Office would slow down. To the question of
would they get a patent? They probably would. Could someone later
invalidate the patent with prior art? They probably could.
I found this to be a good episode about patents, by the way, if
anyone's interested:
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/when-patents-attack
I don't own a Mac. I have no idea what might have made you think that.
Your email address. It's from Apple's email service.
ch...@thinkpenguin.com wrote ..
I sent a few emails one of them was to the organizers of GNI/LinuxFest
Northwest. I mentioned the FSF, Trisquel, and ThinkPenguin as all
possible
participants. I also mentioned the possibility of giving a speech.
Waiting to
hear back on what if anything
If you have to choose, pick LibrePlanet. No question.
Quiliro Ordóñez
I should clarify. If they post the source code to their binary code,
that would remove them from the blacklist.
With the additional clarification that said source code must also be
placed under a free license. Simply publishing it by itself would not
be sufficient as the default
thinkwiki.org has lots of information about this already.
The carl9170 firmware is free software. It's used to run certain
Atheros USB WiFi devices:
http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Drivers/carl9170
It's certainly problematic. Linux-libre neatly sidesteps all of these
issues.
You may find this to be an interesting read, considering some of the
ideas you've expressed.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/compromise.html
Paypal is a cancer and people deservedly distrust it
There are indeed many problems with PayPal (their handling of
WikiLeaks is one problem) which is why I'm boycotting them.
It seems that it may be possible for the FSF to process the donations,
based on this message:
wouldn't my BIOS system reject this card?
Not necessarily, no. The BIOS whitelisting problem isn't that is
rejects all other cards, but that is rejects cards using a PCI ID
that's not contained within the whitelist. According to the
information at thinkwiki.org [0] there are some T42 models that
Why not just use the PPA that Andrew linked to earlier?
its saying it can't download that package using the gdm sudo
command(pressing
ctr alt f1). could it be my network driver or do I need to put the
install
source in the computer.
You probably don't have working networking yet.
Were you booting from the ISO or had you already completed and
And I think it's important to point that that, even if Oracle does
make MySQL proprietary, there will always will that one last release
under the GPL. It'll always be free because the GPL is irrevocable,
even if it has to live on as a fork because upstream went proprietary
for later versions.
86 matches
Mail list logo
