FWIW, openSUSE 10.2 RC5 is goldmastered to be released 7/Dec/06. I have installed RC1 on AMD64, Intel Dual Core, Intel Mobile. Overall it looks good - OpenOffice 2.0.4, KDE 3.5.5, GNOME 2.16.
-- Arun Khan
-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Andreas Jaeger Reply-To: opensuse@opensuse.org To: opensuse-announce@opensuse.org Subject: [opensuse-announce] openSUSE 10.2 is done Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2006 07:30:04 +0100
We've mastered yesterday openSUSE 10.2 RC5 and declared it as goldmaster.
Looking at the comments on the opensuse mailing list and on the websites I hear that 10.2 could become a "great distribution". I hope it does and like to thank all of you for your part in it, especially for:
- Translating software in even more languages than before
- Testing openSUSE 10.2
- Reporting bugs and fixes
- Maintaining packages in our openSUSE build service that got synced into the distribution (I know the sync is a manual process now and I'm looking forward to improvements)
- Helping others testing 10.2
- Suggestions on how to improve 10.2
Our build folks have created the first set of ISO images and will continue to create all of them - and the complete ftp distribution - early next week. We'll start syncing soon the images to the ftp mirrors so that they have all files on thursday, 7th December, for the announcement.
CD production is starting now and I hope to see some shiny green openSUSE 10.2 boxes on the shelves before Christmas.
There are still a lot of bugs open for 10.2 and I'm sure real usage over the time will find some more. We will release via online update security updates for 10.2 as usual and release also the most severe bug fixes. But most bug fixes will only be done for 10.3, our next release coming out next summer.
... snip ...
On Saturday 02 December 2006 19:01, Arun K. Khan wrote:
FWIW, openSUSE 10.2 RC5 is goldmastered to be released 7/Dec/06. I have installed RC1 on AMD64, Intel Dual Core, Intel Mobile. Overall it looks good - OpenOffice 2.0.4, KDE 3.5.5, GNOME 2.16.
Avoid Novell-suse lik the plague. 5 Yrs on u are likely to be bitten very badly. Pending full disclosure (which is proly never going to happen) of the Novell M$ hookup there are too many if's and buts about what Novell will do. If they have any piece of code inside that iso is in violation of M$ patents (.net for one) U (not Novell) can get sued by M$.
Has any one used Sabayon Linux???
I am 2 very sceptical about the whole Novel & M$ tieup. I use SUSE 10.1 on my laptop as it is easiest and quite robust. Mandriva is a good choice but the free version seems half-baked and incompleteafter usingSUSE. Powerpack is very good but whyshould one pay when SUSE is there??? Can anyone suggest which other distro i can switch 2??
On Monday 04 December 2006 17:45, Linux Nerd wrote:
Has any one used Sabayon Linux???
Sabayon is Gentoo based. Don't switch to it unless you know what you're doing.
Linux Nerd wrote:
Has any one used Sabayon Linux???
I am 2 very sceptical about the whole Novel & M$ tieup. I use SUSE 10.1 on my laptop as it is easiest and quite robust. Mandriva is a good choice but the free version seems half-baked and incompleteafter usingSUSE. Powerpack is very good but whyshould one pay when SUSE is there??? Can anyone suggest which other distro i can switch 2??
Hi there,
Why dont you give fedora a try... It comes as a Totally Free Offering, but with just a little bit of work, can be made to support well neigh any hardware out there. The best part is, that it can with just one or at most 2 add on repositories be brought up to spec with almost anything anyone could possible need, and still have a lean and mean system. In fact, wherever i install fedora, the only addon repo i install is the livna repo, basically for bringing down all the multimedia, nvidia, ati and wifi networking stuff. If you have a good internet connection, it shouldnt take you more than 15-20 mins to start playing round with your region-locked DVD's and connecting to your wifi networks, all in a smashing 3d desktop :)
Plus, the Integrated AIGLX based 3D Desktop is wayyyyy too cool. U'll start making even MacOS guys jealous :)
Regards Rajeev
On Monday 04 December 2006 17:45, Linux Nerd wrote:
Has any one used Sabayon Linux???
I am 2 very sceptical about the whole Novel & M$ tieup. I use SUSE 10.1 on my laptop as it is easiest and quite robust. Mandriva is a good choice but the free version seems half-baked and incompleteafter usingSUSE. Powerpack is very good but whyshould one pay when SUSE is there??? Can anyone suggest which other distro i can switch 2??
Learn to adapt. Its the mantra of the Linux community. Use Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian etc... They're all good ones.
On 05-Dec-06, at 10:15 AM, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
Learn to adapt. Its the mantra of the Linux community. Use Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian etc... They're all good ones.
pcbsd
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 10:33, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
pcbsd
No!!!! Don't touch BSD with a 10 foot long pole >:( I might sound paranoid but I have a perfectly good reason for it. FreeBSD 5.2.1 burnt me. Corrupted all my partitions. If it weren't for Knoppix back then I would've lost 120+ GBs of data and work. I was trying to install it on a PHYSICALLY SEPARATE HDD and not on any partition. So if you're playing around with any kind of BSD BE CAREFUL! Thats all I'll say. And NO I am NOT against *BSD in any way!
and IIRC PCBSD is based on FreeBSD...
*cringes*
On 05-Dec-06, at 10:42 AM, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
and IIRC PCBSD is based on FreeBSD...
*cringes*
too late - my new home desktop is going the bsd way - will keep you updated
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 11:10, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
too late - my new home desktop is going the bsd way - will keep you updated
heh...may God be with you! :P Just be careful. Backup everything. If possible PHYSICALLY DISCONNECT the harddrives that you DONT WANT BSD to touch. Its for your own good.
Baaki saab upparwaale ke haath mein hai! :P
On 12/5/06, Dinesh Joshi dinesh.a.joshi@gmail.com wrote:
heh...may God be with you! :P Just be careful. Backup everything. If possible PHYSICALLY DISCONNECT the harddrives that you DONT WANT BSD to touch. Its for your own good.
Baaki saab upparwaale ke haath mein hai! :P
Maybe you were very unlucky. I have installed PC-BSD in the past without any problems. This time there was some problem with the PC-BSD partition but nothing was touched in the other partitions. And anyways have a look at PC-BSD once, it's come a long way in last few years.
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 21:22, mehul wrote:
Maybe you were very unlucky. I have installed PC-BSD in the past without any problems. This time there was some problem with the PC-BSD partition but nothing was touched in the other partitions. And anyways have a look at PC-BSD once, it's come a long way in last few years.
Yes...maybe FreeBSD 5.2.1 had a buggy installer or something but whatever it was I've been scarred once so I wouldn't recommend anybody ( newbie or whoever ) to touch it without caution. It can happen with any OS actually but I am inclined to think BSD is a bit more prone.
I will give it a whirl in my VM :)
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 21:40, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 21:22, mehul wrote:
Maybe you were very unlucky. I have installed PC-BSD in the past without any problems. This time there was some problem with the PC-BSD partition but nothing was touched in the other partitions. And anyways have a look at PC-BSD once, it's come a long way in last few years.
Yes...maybe FreeBSD 5.2.1 had a buggy installer or something but whatever it was I've been scarred once so I wouldn't recommend anybody ( newbie or whoever ) to touch it without caution. It can happen with any OS actually but I am inclined to think BSD is a bit more prone.
Aren't you making too big an issue out of this? Yours could have been a singular case. If this happened to everyone, no one would be using it.
On 05-Dec-06, at 10:44 PM, Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
Yes...maybe FreeBSD 5.2.1 had a buggy installer or something but whatever it was I've been scarred once so I wouldn't recommend anybody ( newbie or whoever ) to touch it without caution. It can happen with any OS actually but I am inclined to think BSD is a bit more prone.
Aren't you making too big an issue out of this? Yours could have been a singular case. If this happened to everyone, no one would be using it.
i have used a bsd server for a couple of years without a single problem. And Yahoo! has 7000 of them
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 22:44, Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
Aren't you making too big an issue out of this? Yours could have been a singular case. If this happened to everyone, no one would be using it.
Sad, that you feel that way. I'm just warning people because of my experience. It definitely wasn't an isolated case.
On Wednesday 06 December 2006 12:12, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 22:44, Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
Aren't you making too big an issue out of this? Yours could have been a singular case. If this happened to everyone, no one would be using it.
Sad, that you feel that way. I'm just warning people because of my experience. It definitely wasn't an isolated case.
Well, warning once is normal. Twice is understandable. But three times is a little too much ;) I got the feeling that you were opposing anyone who took up BSD's side ;)
On Wednesday 06 December 2006 12:52, Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
Well, warning once is normal. Twice is understandable. But three times is a little too much ;) I got the feeling that you were opposing anyone who took up BSD's side ;)
Haha...well my opinion about BSD, the head developer Theo De Raadt and such things are irrelevant...even though sometimes I strongly feel they are leeching off Linux but then again thats my opinion which I did NOT express while warning Kenneth. It was a fair warning, to newbies, and even to the "experienced" users because everyone needs a heads up once in a while...
And I didn't want to say this but it took me 10 whole days to RECOVER all my data and reinstall everything from scratch to get it working the way it was... And I fully blame FreeBSD 5.2.1 for it. The installer had managed to corrupt all partitions in even the unrelated drives.
On 06-Dec-06, at 7:21 PM, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
Well, warning once is normal. Twice is understandable. But three times is a little too much ;) I got the feeling that you were opposing anyone who took up BSD's side ;)
Haha...well my opinion about BSD, the head developer Theo De Raadt and such things are irrelevant...even though sometimes I strongly feel they are leeching off Linux but then again thats my opinion which I did NOT express while warning Kenneth.
please express it - i am interested, especialy the 'leeching off Linux' thingie.
It was a fair warning, to newbies, and even to the "experienced" users because everyone needs a heads up once in a while...
what you dont realise is that forbidden fruit is the most desirable
On Thursday 07 December 2006 05:58, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
please express it - i am interested, especialy the 'leeching off Linux' thingie.
I have no intention of burning down the ILUG BOM server with a Linux vs BSD flame war :P
On Friday 08 December 2006 00:58, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Thursday 07 December 2006 05:58, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
please express it - i am interested, especialy the 'leeching off Linux' thingie.
I have no intention of burning down the ILUG BOM server with a Linux vs BSD flame war :P
Why make such statements in the first place then?
On Friday 08 December 2006 01:50, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Friday 08 December 2006 01:32, Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
Why make such statements in the first place then?
Freedom of speech :P
I said this to an idiot friend of mine who liked to make comments just for fun. I'm repeating it here. Mind you, you might have been joking, but I don't see it as a joke.
Suppose there's some girl who's been raped. You make some comment to her, unknowing as to what she's faced maybe. It hurts her very much and she commits suicide. Who's responsible?
Freedom of speech does not mean that you abuse it. Take some responsibility.
I haven't used BSD, but I'd like to hear your explanation as to this statement. If you do not have an explanation, issue an apology because it is a provocative statement.
On Friday 08 December 2006 11:11, Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
I said this to an idiot friend of mine who liked to make comments just for fun. I'm repeating it here. Mind you, you might have been joking, but I don't see it as a joke.
Who was joking? I was doing people a favor by warning them about hazards of the BSD installer.
I haven't used BSD, but I'd like to hear your explanation as to this
Well then you have no idea of what I am talking about so you should stay away from the discussion. Inherently, *you* are abusing the "Freedom of speech".
statement. If you do not have an explanation, issue an apology because it is a provocative statement.
As I said, my "explanation" would provoke a rather unpleasant discussion on this list. I had taken up the same issue in a couple of BSD forums and it definitely was NOT a pleasant experience for me or them.
I'm ending the discussion here.
On Friday 08 December 2006 11:42, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Friday 08 December 2006 11:11, Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
I said this to an idiot friend of mine who liked to make comments just for fun. I'm repeating it here. Mind you, you might have been joking, but I don't see it as a joke.
Who was joking? I was doing people a favor by warning them about hazards of the BSD installer.
My dear fellow, I was talking about the 'leaching' statement. My entire mail is directed at the leaching statement. Read properly.
On 08-Dec-06, at 11:42 AM, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
I'm ending the discussion here.
first withdraw that 'leeching' accusation and then end the discussion
On 12/8/06, Dinesh Joshi dinesh.a.joshi@gmail.com wrote:
Who was joking? I was doing people a favor by warning them about hazards of the BSD installer.
98 times out of 100 hazards are not due to installers, it's due to the person installing. That goes not only for *BSD but also for GNU/Linux, Windows, etc.
Search the web or talk to some 'computer engineers' out there and you'll find plenty of them warning you about the 'broken Linux installer' that gobbled up their drive.
Always read the manual end to end AND multiple reviews/potential issues before you mess around with a new system.
Disclaimer: I'm not implying that you didn't :)
Regards,
On Friday 08 December 2006 23:44, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
98 times out of 100 hazards are not due to installers, it's due to the person installing. That goes not only for *BSD but also for GNU/Linux, Windows, etc.
I lie in the 2% :P
On 08-Dec-06, at 11:44 PM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
Search the web or talk to some 'computer engineers' out there and you'll find plenty of them warning you about the 'broken Linux installer' that gobbled up their drive.
Always read the manual end to end AND multiple reviews/potential issues before you mess around with a new system.
Disclaimer: I'm not implying that you didn't :)
i didnt. Tried to install pcbsd with some custom partitions - it barfed. Installing with default partitions worked. But with default install, the fonts looked funny and the machine was crawling. Since it was a new machine, no data was there to be lost. Wiped it out and installed ubuntu. Tried custom partitions here too: / - 20 gb /home - 30 gb /var - 30gb
result: Everything got installed in /. And two empty partitions of 30 gb each were created. Seriously thinking of going back to Redhat 5.2 where you are allowed to control every part of the installation process.
On 08-Dec-06, at 11:11 AM, Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
I haven't used BSD, but I'd like to hear your explanation as to this statement. If you do not have an explanation, issue an apology because it is a provocative statement.
i agree - incidently, i have just installed PCBSD - the machine has not blown up so far
On 08-Dec-06, at 12:58 AM, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
please express it - i am interested, especialy the 'leeching off Linux' thingie.
I have no intention of burning down the ILUG BOM server with a Linux vs BSD flame war :P
ilug bom server has handled worse things - go ahead, lot of us are new, some so new that they dont even know that M$ is *not* the enemy
On Friday 08 December 2006 12:09, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
ilug bom server has handled worse things - go ahead, lot of us are
Ok...in the interest of keeping this discussion on topic and preventing the ILUG BOM server from delivering insane amounts of mail i take back what I said...
On 06-Dec-06, at 12:12 PM, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
Aren't you making too big an issue out of this? Yours could have been a singular case. If this happened to everyone, no one would be using it.
Sad, that you feel that way. I'm just warning people because of my experience. It definitely wasn't an isolated case.
they say fools rush in where angels fear to tread - I am looking forward to disregarding your advice ;-)
On 05-Dec-06, at 9:06 PM, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
too late - my new home desktop is going the bsd way - will keep you updated
heh...may God be with you! :P Just be careful. Backup everything. If possible PHYSICALLY DISCONNECT the harddrives that you DONT WANT BSD to touch. Its for your own good.
one hard drive - no data. relax.
On 05/12/06 10:42 +0530, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 10:33, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
pcbsd
No!!!! Don't touch BSD with a 10 foot long pole >:( I might sound paranoid but I have a perfectly good reason for it. FreeBSD 5.2.1 burnt me. Corrupted all my partitions. If it weren't for Knoppix back then I
Hmmm. AFAIK, that only happens when you forget to read the BSD partitioning instructions.
Devdas Bhagat
On Wednesday 06 December 2006 10:16, Devdas Bhagat wrote:
Hmmm. AFAIK, that only happens when you forget to read the BSD partitioning instructions.
Nah...i am pretty well versed with their partitioning scheme. Infact it was the first time I read the release notes and such properly and even kept a printed copy incase of any doubts. It was definitely not my fault as I am pretty careful while partitioning...be it Linux / Windows or any OS.
On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 10:16 +0530, Devdas Bhagat wrote:
On 05/12/06 10:42 +0530, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
No!!!! Don't touch BSD with a 10 foot long pole >:( I might sound paranoid but I have a perfectly good reason for it. FreeBSD 5.2.1 burnt me. Corrupted all my partitions. If it weren't for Knoppix back then I
Hmmm. AFAIK, that only happens when you forget to read the BSD partitioning instructions.
I have installed FreeBSD 2.x/3.x and have not had any probs with installation - even co-existing with Linux/Windows on a single HDD.
However, the PC-BSD v 0.9 something (don't have the CD) installation simply took over an extended partition - no warning no nothing. Luckily for me, the installations on the HDD were expendable.
Test the installation of any OS/software on an experimental system before deploying on production system. Also, keep a backup of your "production" installation and data.
-- akk
On Wednesday 06 December 2006 13:25, Arun K. Khan wrote:
I have installed FreeBSD 2.x/3.x and have not had any probs with installation - even co-existing with Linux/Windows on a single HDD.
I never said everyone, everywhere had a installer issue with BSD.
However, the PC-BSD v 0.9 something (don't have the CD) installation simply took over an extended partition - no warning no nothing. Luckily for me, the installations on the HDD were expendable.
So it *does* have a few bugs which the developers need to work out. Maybe I encountered a similar bug..! :(
Test the installation of any OS/software on an experimental system before deploying on production system. Also, keep a backup of your "production" installation and data.
Agreed...
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 10:33 +0530, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On 05-Dec-06, at 10:15 AM, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
Learn to adapt. Its the mantra of the Linux community. Use Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian etc... They're all good ones.
pcbsd
I tried to install the version that came bundled with one of the LFY issues early2006/late2005. IIRC, it just took over an extended partition w/o giving me a chance to confirm/cancel. I hope they have fixed it.
-- akk
On 12/4/06, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
On Saturday 02 December 2006 19:01, Arun K. Khan wrote:
FWIW, openSUSE 10.2 RC5 is goldmastered to be released 7/Dec/06. I have installed RC1 on AMD64, Intel Dual Core, Intel Mobile. Overall it looks good - OpenOffice 2.0.4, KDE 3.5.5, GNOME 2.16.
Avoid Novell-suse lik the plague. 5 Yrs on u are likely to be bitten very badly. Pending full disclosure (which is proly never going to happen) of the Novell M$ hookup there are too many if's and buts about what Novell will do. If they have any piece of code inside that iso is in violation of M$ patents (.net for one) U (not Novell) can get sued by M$.
expected from you. does this not apply to other distributions ?
--
Rgds JTD
On Monday 04 December 2006 17:48, Harsh Busa wrote:
On 12/4/06, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
On Saturday 02 December 2006 19:01, Arun K. Khan wrote:
FWIW, openSUSE 10.2 RC5 is goldmastered to be released 7/Dec/06. I have installed RC1 on AMD64, Intel Dual Core, Intel Mobile. Overall it looks good - OpenOffice 2.0.4, KDE 3.5.5, GNOME 2.16.
Avoid Novell-suse lik the plague. 5 Yrs on u are likely to be bitten very badly. Pending full disclosure (which is proly never going to happen) of the Novell M$ hookup there are too many if's and buts about what Novell will do. If they have any piece of code inside that iso is in violation of M$ patents (.net for one) U (not Novell) can get sued by M$.
expected from you.
Why?
does this not apply to other distributions ?
The Act of signing such an agreement is like a tacit acknowledgement of Suse having code which is in violation. But more important, the other distros did not sign a deal with M$ absolving themselves and making u liable. The other distro will be liable first. U will ofcourse get bitten with a cease and desist notice in the case of other (violating) distros. Which is why i stick to debian. Using suse without (or even with) reading carefully the terms of distribution would be termed willful violation whenever M$ chooses to sue Novell's non paying customers. But Novell is generous to a fault u know - U have a waiver of 180 days for any freebeer downloads. After which u can reinstall from a new dowload for a further 180 days ad nauseum.
On Monday 04 December 2006 18:27, jtd wrote:
On Monday 04 December 2006 17:48, Harsh Busa wrote:
On 12/4/06, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
Avoid Novell-suse lik the plague. 5 Yrs on u are likely to be bitten very badly. Pending full disclosure (which is proly never going to happen) of the Novell M$ hookup there are too many if's and buts about what Novell will do. If they have any piece of code inside that iso is in violation of M$ patents (.net for one) U (not Novell) can get sued by M$.
expected from you.
Why?
does this not apply to other distributions ?
The Act of signing such an agreement is like a tacit acknowledgement of Suse having code which is in violation.
Does the (software) patent law even apply in India?
does this not apply to other distributions ?
The Act of signing such an agreement is like a tacit acknowledgement of Suse having code which is in violation.
Does the (software) patent law even apply in India?
irrespective. its not important if u r gonna be sued or not . but it is imp to know if u r doing /using something that cud be termed legally incorrect
--
On Monday 04 December 2006 19:20, Harsh Busa wrote:
does this not apply to other distributions ?
The Act of signing such an agreement is like a tacit acknowledgement of Suse having code which is in violation.
Does the (software) patent law even apply in India?
irrespective. its not important if u r gonna be sued or not . but it is imp to know if u r doing /using something that cud be termed legally incorrect
True, but my question is valid and still stands. I'm asking because I do not know.
On 12/4/06, Mrugesh Karnik mrugeshkarnik@gmail.com wrote:
Does the (software) patent law even apply in India?
irrespective. its not important if u r gonna be sued or not . but it is imp to know if u r doing /using something that cud be termed legally incorrect
True, but my question is valid and still stands. I'm asking because I do not know.
It does not apply even one bit in India. It cannot even be termed legally incorrect as you're an Indian and the Indian legal system says that it's not illegal.
USA is not the world... and definitely not India, so enjoy your plateful of GNU/Linux :)
Siddhesh
On Monday 04 December 2006 22:03, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
On 12/4/06, Mrugesh Karnik mrugeshkarnik@gmail.com wrote:
Does the (software) patent law even apply in India?
irrespective. its not important if u r gonna be sued or not . but it is imp to know if u r doing /using something that cud be termed legally incorrect
True, but my question is valid and still stands. I'm asking because I do not know.
It does not apply even one bit in India. It cannot even be termed legally incorrect as you're an Indian and the Indian legal system says that it's not illegal.
Indian patent law does not allow pure softeare patents. But the term "as such " appears in the relevant parts. This is the same as euro law. Which was thoroughly misused and patents on software granted. An attempt to legalise software patents using these previously granted examples as case studies was narrowly prevented. when that failed there was a surreptitious move to legalise these already granted patents. I am not sure of the status now. But none of the patent holders have attempted to sue. Hence validity has not been tested. If you look at the applications filed in India, there are a huge number from various multinationals that try to couple hardware with software and patent the whole. The hardware is basically SY engineering crap or computers (microcontrollers are computers). So to my eye it's software patents thru the backdoor. Besides with increasing dpendence on US for our growth, dont be surprised at all if things change for the worse in the near future. While u are indeed safe from pure software patents, why on earth should u promote crooked clueless companies.
USA is not the world... and definitely not India, so enjoy your plateful of GNU/Linux :)
And aviod indigestion by not using Novell products.
On 04-Dec-06, at 6:57 PM, Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
of Suse having code which is in violation.
Does the (software) patent law even apply in India?
not as of now - although there is a loophole big enough drive a lorry through
On 12/5/06, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
not as of now - although there is a loophole big enough drive a lorry through
Oh, is there? Could you elaboprate on that? I always thought we never had any such troubles.
Regards,
On 05-Dec-06, at 7:15 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
not as of now - although there is a loophole big enough drive a lorry through
Oh, is there? Could you elaboprate on that? I always thought we never had any such troubles.
to put it very briefly, without legalese, although software per se is not patentable, software combined with hardware *is* patentable. And exactly what this means is open to any interpretation.
Why?
coz i personally think of u as blessed by RMS ( jtd fan following : this is a complement to JTD ) :-)
does this not apply to other distributions ?
The Act of signing such an agreement is like a tacit acknowledgement of Suse having code which is in violation.
it is not ! everytime this point was raised novell has got a press release and some other gyan distributed saying they never acknowledge any patent violation.
But more important, the other distros did not sign a deal with M$
absolving themselves and making u liable. The other distro will be liable first. U will ofcourse get bitten with a cease and desist notice in the case of other (violating) distros. Which is why i stick to debian.
i m not sure if i read it correctly but i remembering read it as "ms will not sue novell customers ever". i cud be wrong coz i donot read fine lines in different permutations / combinations.
have you or members of the list gone thru the several announcement and irc transcripts ?
Using suse without (or even with) reading carefully the terms of
distribution would be termed willful violation whenever M$ chooses to sue Novell's non paying customers. But Novell is generous to a fault u know - U have a waiver of 180 days for any freebeer downloads. After which u can reinstall from a new dowload for a further 180 days ad nauseum.
i m not a lawyer . but i think using suse is great . its amazingly cool and novell will never screwup such big time with its customers. if things had been so evil major contributors wud have stepped out after the announcement similar to the one after kde / gnome issue.
my take is novell is not evil . suse rocks and i will support it always :) the way i see this is ms has a subtle way of stepping into the oss market.
PS : this doesnot by any means suggest that other distros are not.
HRB
Harsh Busa wrote:
i m not a lawyer . but i think using suse is great . its amazingly cool and novell will never screwup such big time with its customers. if things had been so evil major contributors wud have stepped out after the announcement similar to the one after kde / gnome issue.
If Novel was free of any M$ proprietary stuff, it would not have to sign any payment deal with M$.
my take is novell is not evil . suse rocks and i will support it always :) the way i see this is ms has a subtle way of stepping into the oss market.
Many a times I wonder ( not connected to the Novel issue ) if rpm based distros are likely to be in troubled licensing waters as rpm is a Red Hat product. Debian based distros are anyway slimmer and use lesser resources.
How was linux packaged before rpm and debian?
Regards,
Rony. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
On Monday 04 December 2006 19:37, Harsh Busa wrote:
Why?
coz i personally think of u as blessed by RMS ( jtd fan following : this is a complement to JTD ) :-)
does this not apply to other distributions ?
The Act of signing such an agreement is like a tacit acknowledgement of Suse having code which is in violation.
it is not ! everytime this point was raised novell has got a press release and some other gyan distributed saying they never acknowledge any patent violation.
That is Novell saying so. Which should count for more negative points. And is as idiotic as me taking anticipatory bail for u just incase u run over somebody in the next five years.
But more important, the other distros did not sign a deal with M$
absolving themselves and making u liable. The other distro will be liable first. U will ofcourse get bitten with a cease and desist notice in the case of other (violating) distros. Which is why i stick to debian.
i m not sure if i read it correctly but i remembering read it as "ms will not sue novell customers ever". i cud be wrong coz i donot read fine lines in different permutations / combinations.
U are wrong. M$ will not sue Novells paying customers. And will not sue non paying customers for ONE EIGHTY DAYS woohoo. I am jumping in my seat with joy.
have you or members of the list gone thru the several announcement and irc transcripts ?
I did quite a few. All nicely moderated and asking the wrong questions. Novell employees defending the idiocity for something essentially indefensible.
i m not a lawyer . but i think using suse is great . its amazingly cool and novell will never screwup such big time with its customers.
They already did. Or they are shipping patented stuff - which is actually a lesser evil than signing that agreement without patented stuff. Shipping patented stuff is a business decision - we would be inconsequential yelpers passing irrelevant comments. Not shipping such stuff but still siginig the agreement means they new that they are providing M$ with a fud opportunity and are worse than M$.
my take is novell is not evil . suse rocks and i will support it always :) the way i see this is ms has a subtle way of stepping into the oss market.
You do have a sense of humour. Like i release ad and PR and giant hoarding, warning all that they are toast because <mumblejumbletumble>. Then send suitnboot to make sales pitch. Ha ha i like that. Very subtle and sweet. I'll remeber to tell suitnboot to plant a kiss on customer while leaving.
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 11:58, jtd wrote:
On Monday 04 December 2006 19:37, Harsh Busa wrote:
Why?
To get a whiff of the future stinks coming your way from the big bully via patents:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39284968,00.htm
Unique tech u know for autodetection. It's terribly difficult for a micon to figure out what's coming on the wire. And incredibly complex and innovative for your code to parse any stuff that comes on the wire.
So all such keyboards and mice will cost a few Rs.100 more than they should. U and i will pay for such incredible complex R & D.
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:27 +0530, jtd wrote:
sue Novell's non paying customers. But Novell is generous to a fault u know - U have a waiver of 180 days for any freebeer downloads. After which u can reinstall from a new dowload for a further 180 days ad nauseum.
There is no time limitation on the openSUSE distro. You must be referring to Novell Linux Desktop/Server.
-- akk
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 14:01, Arun K. Khan wrote:
On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:27 +0530, jtd wrote:
sue Novell's non paying customers. But Novell is generous to a fault u know - U have a waiver of 180 days for any freebeer downloads. After which u can reinstall from a new dowload for a further 180 days ad nauseum.
There is no time limitation on the openSUSE distro. You must be referring to Novell Linux Desktop/Server.
I am referring to specific portions of any Novell distro that could be covered by the patent covenant. Try figuring that out. Is it Yast or odf or autodetection, ntfs tools, ipx, widows lvm. How do u care? It's novells responsibility to not ship patented stuff right?. Ofcourse not u free loader. It's Novells responsibility only to cover paid customers. U have to figure out in 180 days these tiny pieces of flotsam and junk tossing on the GNU ocean and get rid of such things from your part of the sea or else .... Or else u get sued, not by Novell who permitted the download with no restrictions, in full compliance with the gplV2 but by the big bully around the corner whom u were trying to avoid in the first place.
Parts of the gpl v3 specifically cover use of patented tech in gpld software and IMO already covered this type of subterfuge. But it is being tweaked to cover any issues thrown up by this deal.
-
Arun K. Khan -
Devdas Bhagat -
Dinesh Joshi -
Harsh Busa -
jtd -
Kenneth Gonsalves -
Linux Nerd -
mehul -
Mrugesh Karnik -
R. K. Rajeev -
Rony -
Siddhesh Poyarekar