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
> 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
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.
> 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.
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
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?
On Saturday 02 April 2005 06:31, Srinivasan Krishnan wrote:
> While we've discussed this earlier, I'd like your view on the
> following, from the DansGuardian website:
> For all non-commercial 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 use, upon your downloading, DansGuardian 2 is
> licensed under the GPL, however permission to download DansGuardian
> from this, or any mirror, 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.
> 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
Nope. Just smoke and mirrors to trick the less informed into making
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?
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!
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: