Linuxers May 2005

linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in

105 participants
254 discussions

RE: [ILUG-BOM] acers latop AD: can we do something ?
by Dinesh Joshi 10 May '05

10 May '05

>From: "Amol Hatwar" <amol(a)hatwar.org> >I disagree that Acer sucks. I should know. I own an Acer Aspire 3002 NLC >(running Mandrake Linux 10.1). > >As for being cheap, I don't think anybody would have a problem with that. >;) > >Pedantically, there is a lot of difference between cost-effective, >inexpensive and cheap ;). I forgot to mention. The dell is running Fedora Core :) Regards, Dinesh. _________________________________________________________________ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

1 0

Re: [ILUG-BOM] GPL related clarification sought
by sherlock＠vsnl.com 10 May '05

10 May '05

On Tuesday 10 May 2005 15:05, Devdas Bhagat wrote: > On 10/05/05 01:53 -0700, Abhishek Daga wrote: > > > > > > Questions > > a) Does that mean I can buy 1 copy of SuSe/Xandros/RHES/ and > > distribute it as many times as I want? > > RHES is distributed under a specific (FSF approved) contract. Ask > your lawyer for information on the specifics. whatever the contract says u dont care. If the contract prevents u from excersing the rights as assigned in the gpl, the contract is null and void and RH Suse whoever cannot distribute or prevent you from distributing. > > > b) Some Linux distros have the system of activation keys. Is that > > in violation of GPL terms? Which distro. One such - Fortinet - lost a case and gpld everything. " News.com reports that Fortinet has settled its GPL violation suit. "Fortinet has agreed to provide the source code of the Linux kernel and other GPL-licensed components to any interested party. The code is available upon request, for the cost of distribution, from the Fortinet Web site. The company has also agreed to modify its licensing agreement to include the GPL licensing terms with all Fortinet shipments. The settlement agreement also states that no Fortinet partners are subject to legal action." > > For Instance, if I am required to activate my Distro online then > > logically the same activation key will NOT work for the copies of > > the distro? Which therefore prevents me from giving it away for > > free? The activation key is for updates from their website. Quite obviously bandwidth costs money. Hence the machines with copies you make will not be permitted to connect to the website. You could ofcourse setup your own website with the upgrades and have your clones connect to the same. > > Again, ask your lawyer for advice. > > > So is the original statement on that site itself interpreted > > incorrectly or I am reading it out of context? > > This deals with the specifics of copyright and contract laws, and > as such, the best person to answer this would be your lawyer. Read my first line - contract or no contract - u dont care. You cannot have a contract that violates some other part of the law. In this case the rights assigned to a recipient is contingent on the fact that the same right is automatically assigned to the next recipient, without exception of any kind. So if distributor signs a contract to the contrary with anyone they have automatically abrogated their right to distribute and are in fact in violation of the copyrights of numerous contributors to the distro. The contract they have made you sign is illegal and they have willfully committed an illegal act. and have no right to distribute. And as a result you are not bound by the contract and are free to distribute and that you too could file a suit of fraud against distributor for misleading you into an illegal contract. However you cannot file a copyright violation suit against distributor, unless you are a code contributor (Afaik Philip Tellis could do so as also Karunakar of Indic fame). Note that contracts permit two parties to sign away their own rights, not the rights of others, which is what this contract does. This is irrespective of the fact that distributor is offering a service of compiling, debugging, packaging etc. These services are what they can charge for. Infact they can charge the recipient without providing any of these services. Eg you cannot have a contract with me to sell Devdas' house, because u dont own it.But suppose Devdas leases his house to you with a clause permitting subleasing, subject to the condition that the subleasee can further sublease in whole or part and that no leasee can remove this clause in their downstream sublease contract. Then you can sublease to me some or all part of the apartment and i can do the same and so on. Note that we cannot introduce a clause preventing subleasing as per the original contract. So If i sign a contract with someone else preventing sub leasing, i immediately loose the right to sublease. However I can continue to use my portion of the apartment. I am absolutely sure of the above. However IANAL. So take a legal opinion from two lawyers together a copyright expert and a contract expert if you plan on tangling legally with RH or Suse or whoever. If you are planning a bussiness by placing restrictions on the recipient, perish the thought. Final word. If the original code is gpld, you can copy and distribute the code and the binary to your hearts content - contract or no contract. rgds jtd

2 1

Re: Re: [ILUG-BOM] GLUG meet on Eclipse this 15th?
by Mangesh V Rakhunde 10 May '05

10 May '05

Where is HBCSE and what time ????

2 1

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Allocating memory userwise
by Amish Mehta 10 May '05

10 May '05

Vidyadutt S wrote: > Is there any way to allocate a chunk of memory to a user? The user > should be allocated a particular "range" in the memory when he logs > in. man ulimit Dont know about allocating range but this might be of use. Also we would be glad if you share your knowledge when you succeed. Amish.

1 0

GPL related clarification sought
by Abhishek Daga 10 May '05

10 May '05

At this site: http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Networking-Overview-HOWTO-2.html I came across this. Linux has been copyrighted under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL). This is a license written by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) that is designed to prevent people from restricting the distribution of software. In brief, it says that although money can be charged for a copy, the person who received the copy can not be prevented from giving it away for free. It also means that the source code must be available. This is useful for programmers. Anybody can modify Linux and even distribute his/her modifications, provided that they keep the code under the same copyright. Questions a) Does that mean I can buy 1 copy of SuSe/Xandros/RHES/ and distribute it as many times as I want? b) Some Linux distros have the system of activation keys. Is that in violation of GPL terms? For Instance, if I am required to activate my Distro online then logically the same activation key will NOT work for the copies of the distro? Which therefore prevents me from giving it away for free? So is the original statement on that site itself interpreted incorrectly or I am reading it out of context? thanks! abhi Discover Yahoo! Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html

2 1

Allocating memory userwise
by Vidyadutt S 10 May '05

10 May '05

Hello All, Is there any way to allocate a chunk of memory to a user? The user should be allocated a particular "range" in the memory when he logs in. Regards Vidyadutt.

1 0

Commercial :-Urgently Reqd Linux Admin at Muscat
by deshpande＠vsnl.com 10 May '05

10 May '05

Hello Linuxers I got an email from my friend Ketan who is in Muscat Their company urgently needs Linux Admin Any body intrested pl send your resume >Hello, > How are you all there, this ketan here from muscat.Our company is looking for > someone having experience in linux. > This is an urgent requirement,pls send your resumes to me at the earliest if > any of you are interested or if know someone who has an experience in linux at > the earliest. > Do treat this mail as urgent and you can act accordingly. > Bye > Ketan Mahesh Deshpande Tel 09322034838

1 0

MTNL TriBand - unable to browse under Linux
by Arun Khan 10 May '05

10 May '05

I have a multi boot system with Win XP, SuSE 9.2, Ubuntu 4.10, which is hooked up to the DLink 502T ADSL modem/router provided by MTNL (no wiring issues). WAN IP is dynamic, LAN IP is 192.168.1.1. DHCP server is enabled on the router to dish out IP numbers. When I boot to SuSE or Ubuntu, or Knoppix 3.6, I am unable to connect to sites on the Internet (POP3, SMTP, HTTP etc.) using Konqueror or Firefox. When I point my browser to mumbai.mtnl.net.in or mail.yahoo.com, the status bar says "Connecting to ...." and eventually times out. I am able to resolve DNS names (using MTNL's DNS servers). I am able to ping certain hosts in the MTNL network such as mumbai.mtnl.net.in, their gateway, etc. Firewall is disabled (iptables rules allow everything). The routing table also seems to be OK (see output below). However, when I boot the same system to Win XP. I am able to connect and browse sites on the 'Net. Another interesting point, when I connect the system to another ISP Iqara (similar setup as MTNL i.e. a cable modem/router with DHCP) I am able to browse sites under Linux as well as Win XP. Note: in both cases the system is getting it's network params from the router's DHCP server). >>>>>>>> For MTNL TriBand >>>>>>>> > route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 > cat /etc/resolv.conf nameserver 192.168.1.1 >>>>>>>> For Iqara.net >>>>>>>> > route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 > cat /etc/resolv.conf search * nameserver 192.168.0.1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts/suggestions on what could be the problem? TIA, akk

1 1

Re: [ILUG-BOM] GLUG meet on Eclipse this 15th?
by M.R.Anand 10 May '05

10 May '05

HBCSE would be the ideal location. No traffic hassles, and really easy to get to.

3 2

Postfix and catch all account
by komal 09 May '05

09 May '05

Regards,How to enable receive email from a single 'catch all' account and distribute locally to users in Postfix? Thank you Regards, Komal

3 2

← Newer
1
...
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
...
26
Older →

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 May 2005