Linuxers

linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in

14152 discussions

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Nagarjuna G. 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

2006/10/10, Abhishek Choudhary <choudhary(a)indicybers.net>: > Well why not "Linux/GNU" instead of "GNU/Linux"? Is it some age factor? :) > > All right, if you use Hurd then probably only GNU or Hurd/GNU! To be > clear, show me one machine that runs vanilla "GNU". Amusing right - you > might think I am a novice who does not know why one needs a kernel! If > _you_ do understand the need for a kernel then why emphasize that GNU is > an "Operating System" instead of claiming it to be what it actually is - a > wonderful "toolchain". > GNU is an operating system, and that is why the prooject talks of everything:kernel+userland+toolchain+desktop etc., GNU project is a comprehensive project. The kernel is still taking the first steps, falling now and then, the toddler way. This project did not start now, but in 1984. Why do you say it is JUST a tool chain, when you know that without it no free software can be made, maintained and distributed free. If you use 'JUST a x' to a dispensable thing, you may be right. Prove that it is dispensable. Kernel is indispensable, so we embrace all free kernels. > Well then GNU is indeed dependent on Linux, just as the latter is > dependent on it. Lets call a chair a chair and a table a table. that is why I called it symbiosis. we are not those who excluded it, the others did so. So tell them dependable core things cannot be excluded. > Then why does GPL tend to restrict it? Why are non-English versions of GPL > not officially available? (correct me if this is novice Q) Why does GPL > not address the issues regarding localisation? Why does GPL take away ones > rights to actually write prorietary code derived from it? Suicidal! Because, that kills freedom of others, and does not preserve the existing freedom. If we dont preserve existing GPL code, it does not stay, grow, multiply, and inherit. The restriction in GPL is intended to protect freedom from evaporating. Invention of copyleft is one of the greatest hacks of the last century, which made all this possible. Growth of freedom is possible only in a copyleft culture. In short, to protect the freedom. > (Forgive me if I > have touched on a painful nerve) There are numerous commercial software > vendors who use GNU software in their commercial stuff. For instance HP- > UX. All of us who have used it know the extent to which GNU is a part of > HP-UX. It suits HP's model. They are a hardware vendor, and make money > from hardware more than they do from software. However, think of a small > time developer. An individual who has his aspiations, dreams, wishes, and > a word in his heart which reads like "freedom". If he were to develop a > very niche piece of software, he would be forced to make public his source > code because he cannot use commercial tool-chain, and is therefore left > with GNU, which implies his code falls under the GPL license. Now whose > freedom are we talking about??? I am not clear. If he is the original author of the program, then he is free to decide. Please read http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html > Please! Lets talk freedom - freedom as in free, lest freedom becomes the > next f-word! Look at the 95% of our population to whom all of this > discussion just does not make any sense. No not because it is not > relevant, but because it is in English! That is why, let us work hard to localize all applications to Indian languages, then 65% people will have potential access. > it!!!!!! Still not. Come on get down to producing some real work now. > Probably instead of keying in useless comments and counter comments, > concentrate on keying in at least a few lines of code. You will certainly > be helping FSF a lot more that way. And indeed if you also do something > for the 95% (which many of you involved in Indic localisation are actually > doing), then trust me you will also have done a lot of good > towards "Freedom". You are right, that is why I contribute to Indic-computing, as well as to another GNU project (GNOWSYS). Other projects that I contribute to are gnowledge.org, gnoware.org, the Indic fonts (Gargi, Samyak) and supervising several others. There are others in this list too who are active contributors. True, working is more fun. Nagarjuna

3 2

Anybody has Freespire LIVE CD?
by Roshan 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

Hello list, Anyone who has tried Freespire LIVE CD, if available? Can someone burn a copy for me? -- http://360.yahoo.com/sriram4420 __________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new http://in.answers.yahoo.com/

1 0

[OT] A case of ransom.
by Rony 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

Hello All, I know a CA who uses a legal version of $ally 5.4. He cannot open data created by 7.2, so I asked him why does he not upgrade, since he is a legal user, upgrade must be free as in beer. He said that upgrade or new version costs the same. I feel, this is nothing but holding the customer to ransom as his clients' data made on 7.2 is as good as locked, till he buys the new version. While data created in 5.4 can be imported into 7.2, data created in 7.2 cannot be reverse ported on 5.4. What I want to know is that can 5.4 users legally force $ally to provide reverse portability into older versions as they are still legal? Regards, Rony. ___________________________________________________________ Win a BlackBerry device from O2 with Yahoo!. Enter now. http://www.yahoo.co.uk/blackberry

3 3

How to do a minimal install?
by Aniket Suryavasnshi 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

Hello everybody! /Call from a student/ I'm following this group since quite a long time, and I've got many new things to learn from it even without asking. Thanks for it guys. Now I have a quite simple question. I want to install a light version of Linux. I want to just write C programs in it and run them. It could do without the GUI. I've heard that Linux can be installed by getting the kernel, libraries and tools of our choice separately and then compiled to form a complete OS. How can it be done? -- With eggs so cheap these days, there's no point running behind chicks! ;)

5 4

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

>> This is just your assumption, who is asking any one to credit GNU for >> a non GNU project? The system is indeed GNU system with Linux as a >> kernel. When the kernel was completed, the only thing you need is to >> add is the GNU system to make it an OS. And the kernel was also >> completed using GNU tools. Under such a situation, why do you think >> we are asking for a thing that we didn't deserve? > Hehehe. Thank you. Exactly what I needed to hear from an FSF > representative. Now would you be so kind as to make sure everyone who > tries to spread GNU philosophy is clear upon this point? What do you mean? I think you never needed to hear anything from any FSF representative. You need to tender an apology. Pray do not start throwing mud around, and then do a 'hehehe'. Get me one GNU hacker who said Linux is owned by GNU. > I've had arguments with people about this, even during the RMS lecture. Pity, > for the lack of time on RMS' part meant that I couldn't bring up this > issue right there. Does not mean you level false charges and go 'hehehe'. > There goes Vihan's argument from the Andheri BoF. Granted that he did > not mean that GNU owned the kernel, but I suppose he has no right to > say this: > "But Linus himself uses GCC to build the kernel.." Eh? Why can not Vihan say so? Linus Torvalds said he could not have made Linux without GCC. He does say GCC is used to compile Linux. > Yes, well the point is, to a layman, who is completely new to this > world, the word GNU doesn't make any sense. Ok fine. So what makes sense? Linux? The X factor is it, eh? For all the reasoning, Linus Torvalds can be labelled as egoistic, if one went by the anti-FSF lobby. After all Linus named the kernel after himself, while Stallman never named GCC as 'Stallman Compiler Collection', Emacs as 'Stallman Editor', and the Free Software Movement as 'Stallman's Movement', and GNU as 'Stallman is Not Proprietary'. :-) But many GNU people do think Linux sounds cool, so why throw mud at GNU? Regards, Debarshi -- Microsoft does have a Y2K problem... it's called GNU/Linux!

4 3

Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Vihan Pandey 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

> To be very precise, there isn't a Free alternative to gcc yet. If the > GNU folks will continue with the whole GNU/Linux thing, I might just > get bugged enough to write a BSD licensed compiler. Does that mean you would have absolutely no problem at all in exploitative corporates taking your hard work, (sometimes) turning it into crap and making a huge pile of cash on it ? Talking about freedom and practicing it is not just a momentary thing but has to be a continuous and perpetual struggle. If we leave the option for people to take what they want and commercialise it, they will never bother about freedom and the cause is diminished. If the restriction of keeping the released work also free is put, it makes them at least consult lawyers and think on ``Why did this person/group decide to do things this way ?" and that is the beginning of victory because you start to make people think about things they otherwise take for granted. That's the stuff revolutions are made of. Then of course we are in a philosophical quandary of ``restricting freedom to preserve freedom". My simple answer to that is, GPL has proved that it CAN work and IS working. But my whole point is that GNU/Linux is pretty much useless to me. > Regardless of how essential gcc is. If the GNU project gets credits, > everyone else deserves the same amount of time. Hmm... is it not so that in all GNU projects painstaiking efforts are made to credit every single person who contributed to any project. In fact in the GNU C manual itself they are about 20 odd pages in the pdf crediting every person individually with the work they did. This includes BSD guys who did the BSD ports. This happens irrespective of what the personal beliefs are(i don't recall seeing a tag near anyone's name stating with GNU or without GNU :-) ) Therefore when credit is given to a community, it is every single individual that has worked who is actually credited. Moreover, and correct me if i'm wrong, but GNU was the first movement to credit every person involved with a software project in a public manner. Dispensing with the GPL? Definitely. Dispensing with the GNU project? > Right now, other than the compiler, what else do you need to get a full > BSD userland? My thesis is that Linux != GNU/Linux and there are other > projects which deserve equal time in the OS name. If you truely feel that way and are passionate about freedom, you could start a movement to do the same telling people that ``Zero restriction freedom is true freedom" and you could also perhaps call it GING(GING Is Not GNU) if you are not fond of G's, but love B's you could call it BING(BING Is Not GNU) which actually sounds quite neat :-) Regards, - vihan

4 3

Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Roshan 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

<removed all previous posts> Please do not take this post as sarcasm. It is a contemplation of the thread. <begin> Perhaps, we have exercised our ``freedom of speech'', to the best of our abilities. There have been only arguments and no consensus on why 'GNU/Linux' or 'Linux'. Let us give a new name based on Union in Set Theory in mathematics acceptable to both, GliNUx, *ONLY FOR THIS Mailing list* ;-) -- http://360.yahoo.com/sriram4420 __________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new http://in.answers.yahoo.com/

5 5

Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Vihan Pandey 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

> No. I use enough BSD licensed software to know how the BSD community > works. > Given the popularity of web services, DRM and closed hardware (how many > people > here use nvidia's drivers?), I don't really the GPLv2 as giving a > specific advantage to end users. The one way to get around the > requirements for distributing source is not to distribute it at all, but > only provide public APIs (or protocols) to allow access to your code. We NEED to distribute source, just giving away API's sets a bad precedence for the project. If its an issue of source distribution, have you looked at Affero GPL ? Please note that I have no issues with commercialising code. Nor does > the FSF. Both of us have issues with closing source for the second level > of users. The _sole_ reason I would be using the BSD license would be > to keep the GNU zealots away. That's not really the right way to go. You have every right to criticize anyone but releasing software under BSD style license(for freedom) just because you disagree with/dislike GNU and what it stands for set's a bad precedent. Moreover you can say what you want, but history is not going to change because of that. We owe FSF/GNU for starting this value system, lets not forget that. For whenever man forgets freedom or descends into callousness, the end result is a tyrannical society which in the end ends up destroying itself, only to go back to the value system. And should I not then give equal credit to every project which has > contributed to my Linux system? Does that justify calling it "Linux" alone ? If you are are truely advocating giving credit to everyone call it GNU/Linux/Apache/_all_other_stuff_you_may_be_using When your BSD style licensed copiler does get finished and you are NOT AT ALL using ANY GNU tools nor follow the GNU philosophy. Please call your system whatever you want. Untill then you cannot simply dismiss GNU. Saying GNU/Linux deprives the other communities of that credit. Does that justify calling it "Linux" alone ? If you are are truely advocating giving credit to everyone call it GNU/Linux/Apache/_all_other_stuff_you_may_be_using deja vu . . . Regards, - vihan

2 1

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by പ്രവീണ്‍‌|Praveen 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

2006/10/10, Mrugesh Karnik <mrugeshkarnik(a)gmail.com>: > > On Tuesday 10 October 2006 16:19, Nagarjuna G. wrote: > > > Tell me something. Some people who are 'fans' of GNU, go to such lengths > as to call all the software that's been licensed under the GPL, GNU > software. Now if I write some software and use GPL for it, I'd most > certainly not be willing to accredit it to GNU. Why should I? Like > Linux said, "Authors matter." By using the term GNU/Linux, it seems as > though Linux is just a part of the GNU project. It is not. Linux is not part of GNU project, that is why it is not GNU Linux (softwared from GNU project has names like that GNU Emacs, GNU grub, GNU compiler collection... ) GNU/Linux (pronounced GNU slash Linux) means GNU+Linux. Just because > someone uses your tools to build their own software does not mean that > you own that software. Linux developed a kernel and GNU project build tools around that is a wrong idea. If you had done some reasearch about the rigin you would have realised it. GNU project was started to build a complete Free Operating system and they started replacing parts of unix and they reached a point when they replaced most parts for a Unix like system except for the kernel. At that time Linux was not released and there were no kernels available as Free Software (the original BSD license was not Free Software) so they started building their own kernel replacement called Hurd. But when Linus Torva;ds released his kernel under GPL v2 it filled that gap and we didn't have to wait for Hurd to finish to have a complete Unix like system. So instead of adopting Linux as GNU's official kernel (since it tries to be upto Unix while hurd tries to improve upon Unix ideas) Linux was combined with the rest of the GNU system to make a comple Unix like Operating System and it is called GNU-slash-Linux clearly meaning GNU+Linux (as opposed to GNU Linux would mean GNU's version of Linux). GNU project gave creadit to linux as without it we would not have the complete system and it is an important contribution. Linus torvalds didn't write the system to have a complete Free Operating system, but it was started as a college project. The motivation is different that freedom. So when you remove GNU from picture the history is twisted. The reason why the Free Software movement was started not because programming was fun but because we respect users Freedom and there was no Free operating systems available, so we wrote one.

2 1

[Commercial] Linux Device Driver 15 Oct, RTLinux 4 Nov
by hemendra jain 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

Hi All, We are going to commence our next batch as follows: Linux Device Driver: 15 Oct RTLinux : 4 Nov Rgds, Hemendra Jain (S N Embedded) 98205 65918

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