Linuxers April 2005

linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in

123 participants
307 discussions

Re: [ILUG-BOM] WinXp Vs Linux
by sherlock＠vsnl.com 02 Apr '05

02 Apr '05

On Friday 01 April 2005 00:48, Rony Bill wrote: > > Dear Jude, > > Your tone of writing reminded me of these words that appeared in > the Asian Age on 28th March. "It is only imperfection that > complains of what is imperfect. The more perfect we are, the more > gentle and quiet we become towards the defects of others"--Joseph > Addison. > > If you have the capacity to be polite then I would like to get one > doubt cleared. Never ever claimed to be perfect - that is why i read manpages and licenceses before clicking "I agree". And i am most certainly politness challenged. So there. > Can any commercial linux distro be copied and > installed in a commercial or corporate organisation? Is that > installation considered a valid legal and liscenced copy? All software (including copies) distributed under the GPL (and several other licences like /QPL/Mozilla/BSD etc afaik) licences are 100% legal and valid. You can use such copies any way you please including charging a zillion dollars for the copy. What you cant do with the gpl is prevent the recepient from 1) making copies and distributing the same. 2) making changes to the software Also you have to make avaialble at no additional charge except the cost of media the source code for the software INCLUDING ANY CHANGES OR DERIVATIVES YOU MAKE to such gpld code. So you can buy a "licenced" version of a "commercial" distro like RH and buy a cd franking plant and frank a zillion copies and sell em. The exception is that 1) You will have to remove trade marks like redhat, RH etc. and put your own Gandhi topee if u please. 2) Remove software having EULAS (eg winmodem, NVIDIA drivers) 3) You cannot copy the manuals which have exclusive (as in you are excluded from coying rights) copyrights. The term "licence" and "commercial" is a red herring planted by the likes of RH, Trolltech and a few others who would like to confuse you into believing that gpl software not traded for cash is not commercial. Grep the list for eariler posts on this issue. Any GNU/Linux distro or gpl softaware is commercial if it is traded for something of value (including barter of cds). So buy one "commercial" copy and copy and sell to hearts content. When you buy support you will get access to a fast server and / or email / phone support so that you can patch and maintain the stuff better. You can then make copies of the patch ad nauseum and offer the same to your clients. In effect the commercial distros companies are providing expertise not just software and they are fully justified in charging what ever they please. And you can have a completely legal parasitic existence by the above methods. In fact you can provide better services and charge more (after RTFM) than them. So then happy legal copying and installing of RH, Suse, whatever. If you ask me i would tell you to use Debian and avoid the pain trying to remove logos while simultaneously not providing word of mouth advertising and a ready-to-eat client to your competitor. rgds jtd

4 3

Re: [ILUG-BOM] File Locking using smbmount
by Keith Fernandez 02 Apr '05

02 Apr '05

Rishi wrote > However, the Linux client computers use smbmount to > map the shares within their home folders, which do not > lock the files... so when two users on the network try to access the same file, the contents of the file will be that > of the person that saved the file the last. I think the application that you use(for e.g. kwrite..) also need's to understand File locking capabilities, which is present in Office in windows. What application do you use to access the file? For e.g. Notepad in windows will not have file locking capabilities. Regards, Keith -------------------------- Reliance IDC DAKC Navi Mumbai 022-30374188 -------------------------- Disclaimer: This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited

1 0

File Locking using smbmount
by Rishi 02 Apr '05

02 Apr '05

Hi I have a Samba Server on RH9 and when I map the shares on Windows client computers, the files are locked so the users do not accidentally overwrite other people's files on the network. (This is the good news) However, the Linux client computers use smbmount to map the shares within their home folders, which do not lock the files... so when two users on the network try to access the same file, the contents of the file will be that of the person that saved the file the last. I've looked at the man page of smbmount to see if I can enable file locking at the client level .... no joy. Any tips on how to fix this? Thanks Rishi

2 1

Re: GPL [Was: Re: [ILUG-BOM] WinXp Vs Linux]
by sherlock＠vsnl.com 02 Apr '05

02 Apr '05

On Saturday 02 April 2005 06:31, Srinivasan Krishnan wrote: > JT, > > While we've discussed this earlier, I'd like your view on the > following, from the DansGuardian website: > > <snip> > For all non-commercial[1] use DansGuardian 2 can be downloaded > under the GPL. For all non-commercial use I grant the end-user > permission to download DansGuardian 2. Upon your downloading of > DansGuardian 2 for non-commercial use I license it under the GPL. > > For all commercial[2] use, upon your downloading, DansGuardian 2 is > licensed under the GPL, however permission to download DansGuardian > from this, or any mirror[3], website is restricted. Ya! I read this earlier. And it's a very red herring. Once you have a gpld copy you can do exactly as you please including selling it COMMERCIALLY. Downloading from HIS website or the mirrors which have similiar restrictions may not be allowed (BW costs money). But I can setup a mirror with a gpld copy and offer it for money (or gratis) to all and sundry. The para below is clear as smoke glass. And you are partly correct in that the bugfixes are paid for downloads. But once you get em they are gpld as it is very obviously a derivate of gpld software. So distribute to your hearts content. > > The restrictions on the downloading for commercial use are that you > may only download it once for free. This will enable you to try out > the software before making a decision to purchase a commercial > licence to download it. In order to download updates, bug fixes, > etc, you must purchase a download licence. > </snip> > > Based on your interpretation (which I believe to be correct), how > does he get away with this? The only thing I can think of is that > the changes, bug fixes etc. that he mentions are not GPL'd and will > not be posted for free download. Which again is probably not a > huge deal even for a non-programmer, since they would generally be > rolled into the next release. ALL bugfixes of gpld software are automatically derived works (you cant have a bug fix standing by itself) and the gpl applies automatically. If he gives you a copy (It is perfectly legal to not give any one a copy eg. google uses modified gnu stuff but does not distribute it to any one) you can freakout with it . > > Also, if for commercial use DansGuardian gets licenced under the > GPL on the first download, I should be able to make and dstribute > (sell, give away, whatever) as many copies as I wish. Then where > do his stated restrictions on commercial use apply? There is no restriction. Like I said this is a red herring and the author cannot take legal action. > > > So buy one "commercial" copy and copy and sell to hearts content. > > When you buy support you will get access to a fast server and / > > or email / phone support so that you can patch and maintain the > > stuff better. You can then make copies of the patch ad nauseum > > and offer the same to your clients. > > This licence seems funny to me. Is there more to this than is > obvious? Nope. Just smoke and mirrors to trick the less informed into making a purchase. rgds jtd

1 0

Ubuntu/apt-get vs Fedora/yum
by Revant 01 Apr '05

01 Apr '05

I dont want a fight here, I want to configure yum better if possible When i installed fedora, it had wide range of software on cds, so for that I will prefer fedora But when I started yum for first time according to fedora FAQ. it takes hours apt-get does apt-get update in just 5 mins Whats the difference and why does yum costs time and apt-get is faster?

1 0

Invitation
by Sajidali Baig 01 Apr '05

01 Apr '05

Sajidali Baig has invited you to join hi5. By joining hi5, you will be connected to Sajidali and all of Sajidali's friends. hi5 is the place where friends meet. You can use hi5 for the following purposes: * Find old friends * Meet new people * Browse photos Join Sajidali, meet Sajidali's friends, and meet people that share your interests now! Click here: http://www.hi5.com/register/LB8NM?inviteId=U3ON6NLNEX17233116l360928358 This invitation was sent to linuxers(a)mm.ilug-bom.org.in on behalf of Sajidali Baig (sajidalibaig(a)gmail.com). If you do not wish to receive invitations from hi5 members, click on the link below: http://www.hi5.com/friend/displayBlockInvite.do?inviteId=<#randomId#>

4 4

Fwd: [bcslug] Fergusson Linux released!
by Amit Karpe 01 Apr '05

01 Apr '05

-- param vaibhavam netum etat swaraashtram samrthaa bhavatwaashishaa tebhrusham || Bharat Maata Ki Jay ||

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Linuxers April 2005