hello i have a problem related to gpl3 licensing
i want to release some software under it
but i also want to be able to create gpl apps with libraries like qt
being them licensed under gpl2 for free software, do i have to add a particular clause so as to ensure compatibility? I alone "own" the "copyright" for the code.
thanks

if you have the copyright for the entire code then you can make a gpl v2 exception
although, hm

it breaks the point
the two are meant to be incompatible from what I understand

hi
i am back

just release your program under gpl v2 or later and point out in a readme or whatever that qt itself is under gpl v2 only

i have created some wallpapers for GPLv3 and GNU

cool

http://arnuld.blogspot.com

i will have to study this more in depth then
thanks lc2

i am no artist, so they are not funky or eye-candy or something like that. all wallpapers are under Free Art License

k
brb, sick

hi
um
shouldnt you link to a copy of the license
i mean free art license

aneb, i did
aneb, check my blog, i have mad it clear there
aneb, check my blog, i have made it clear there
andar, ?
aneb, r u there ?

i saw u type that, dont expect a response all the time

aneb,
ok

and i dont see a copy of the free art license

aneb, you will a link to the original license , copy that in your web-browser
andar, link is beneath my photo
andar, a little down there

that's not a copy. you should post the free art license on your blog in case the main site goes down
or in a tarball as a file

aneeb, is that required for legal reasons ?

copyright licenses don't say what you do. they say what people modifying/using/etc the work can do, but your actions are a extension of that

i know
copyright license is for use/redistribution by people other than me

did you notice "but your actions are a extension of that"?

my actions, you mean
as i am the copyrigth owner
so i can give other some permissions if i need to do so
right ?

i didnt mean that

the please explain
i am just new to this license thing

let me read up on the lkicense hold
ok nm
you followed section 2.2 so its good

well, i did not even know that i followed section 2.2
i read that section and i got it, i am right

you follow all 4 requirements… therefore other people can too

thanks for putting your time
aneb

if a copyright holder doesnt follow the requirements set out wrt redistribution, by providing a header, a name, and a pointer to the license, that most FLOSS licenses require, then they are not being moral, and are putting others in hell
it's like if i dont enforce the GNU GPL
on my work
and np

i have 768mb of memory on my desktop how much swap space should i use?

good habit is twice the memory size
but that depends on what will you use the machine for and how much disk space do you have

if the machine starts swapping, you can trash it and throw it out of the window anyway
I still recommend 2xRAM because of swsusp and the like

man i feel terrible
"twice the memory size" is a silly rule
the more memory you have, the less swap you need
the less memory you have, the more swap you need

ofc it is

having 768mb of RAM, a swap disk space of 500mb is fine

yes

it's not a silly rule if you want to swap out some unused memory for other applications

it is a silly rule

it would be really clever for a guy with 4GB to have 8GB+ swap
(not)

and it's also not silly if you want to hibernate

it is basic cache theory

yeah, there is that
people have been saying "swap partition twice physical memory" since before computers could hibernate, though

to use the "twice the memory size" as a general rule is silly

heh

they were full of shit back then, and most people who say it today still are
the amount of swap you need depends on the amount of memory you'll need, not how much you have
said cpt obvious

we would be using 500mb l2 cache to cache 1gb of RAM memory

you're right

i tend to be

hello honorables

hello gay

gay who? me?

are you

not yet..?
been looking for a howto…

for becoming gay?

well, if to become a gnu member is a requirement, yes
hahaha
http://www.libervis.com/article/merging_open_source_and_free_software slap their fingers

3

that looks like a nuclear fart

it makes a good point
free software vs open source was an unnecessary schism

bsd ftw!

agreed

the gpl police is coming after me

I don't think so… FS has stood its grounds firmly while OA managed to become the laughter of the donkeys, now they want to get back the dignity by hiding under the FS wing? I don't think so

it's an unnecessary schism because people on both sides have made it so
(well, on one side, i'm thinking ESR)

OA and ESR are halfways… I ceased to take them seriously and generally speaking not many are taking them seriously

and stallman played into his hands by drawing such a hard line between pragmatic and moral arguments, when in reality, they're one and the same

I haven 't read what stallman said, but I did read ESR and now to me it looks like a joke
empty words..

ESR is just as divisive a person as stallman is
there was never any reason to reject freedom rhetoric any more than there was reason to downplay the practical benefits

OA has become a joke… anyone who wants to label his stuff OA can do so and they dont damn care about the principles
OA is just a season fashion nowadays

OA?

errr OS…
sorry

Open Arse

is this an appropriate place for an autoconf question?

probably the channel where your distro is discussed

okay, thanks

Autoconf questions are on topic here.

okay i'll ask here too; i'm trying to link a c++ lib (i wrote a c wrapper); CC is gcc, which is what i want for building the C program, but the final linking of object files fails unless i use g++; is there a way to specify in autoconf to use a different compiler to link everything for
main?

I am sorry I did not understand it is about the compile host only

well; i am not sure the "right" way to fix this
i am not experienced w/ using c++ from c, so maybe i messed up building the interface
but i do know that if i can tell g++ to do the link step somehow in autoconf it'l at least let me test without having to do the last part manually

I haven't built C++ code with autotools, but would sound logical if you have one .cpp file, it would automatically use C++ flags when linking.

okay.. back to the internet then

q. im using gnumake and got a variable in the Makefile which is SLOTA_TARGET, i would like to specify this variable from the command line option, is that possible ? something like "make SLOTA_TARGET=linux"

yes
that's how you do it

moauoauoau
silly me, i have even tried
failed to found it in the doc tho
thanks
i have even - i havent even

haha

hi!
can anyone help me a bit with @INTLTOOL_DESKTOP_RULE@ ??
i want to know if is there any way to substitute a variable on a .desktop file after applying the @INTLTOOL_DESKTOP_RULE@

Did the Core GNU/Linux ever materialize?

has anyone here a little time to help me with variables substitutions using autoconf??

any know how to embed gpg in to thunderbird mail client, I downloaded enigmail, but it doesnt work or plugin

str, works fine for me…

Install, right?

wierd, I am running thunderbird ver 2.0.0.6 & there is no Extension in the Tools tab, why is mine differ

I'm running 1.5.0.12.
I'm running Ubuntu, and was able to apt-get both thunderbird and enigmail. However, I believe I've installed it manually in the past.

however I do have add-ons and when I use it to download Engmail 0.95.3, I get could not install because of incompactibility with firefox, why is it trying to install it for firefox instead of thunderbird
ok I got, I phisically dropped the downloaded file onto the thunderbird add-on box, now, its fine, thanks

you physically dropped it?
wow

str, cool.

yes, because firefox thinks the addon belongs to him

doh!

how would i getgdb to break at a certain function?

clever, typically, "b functionname"…

it was a function within a class
but i managed to get it on my first try
i now have a backtrace of when the program tcp connects to iself(causing a feedback)
now i need to see why it connects to itself

So, what's GNU?
*sigh*

hi seyfarth

hello.

how are you today?

Frustrated… I just got a laptop for college and I wanted to copy my music onto it but it's DRM'd. Had to re-rip everything

what? Oo
can you explain that again?

In Windows media player, music ripped can be automatically copyprotected.

lol

Which I unknowingly turned on

you should be shot in the head for using windows anyway
and in a painful way for saying that here

I'm beginning to realize that
So then, is GNU fairly easy for a newbie to grasp? I'm going to college and will need to be able to hit up open office and print quite a bit

easy enough

i don't think i ever saw any "noob" refer to GNU as an OS
ever

anychance we have a FUSE junkie in here

that's good

##fuse is kind of dead now…

haha

Easier to type than GNU/Linux.
I take it ubuntu would be the way to go?

whatever you like

hello

hey

hallo

if that's gonna get you to install a free os, then yeah, do that, just be careful of the non-free software
hi blazemonger

hi lc2
MusIx is the only free distro that will function on m7y systems for some odd reason
and dyne:bolic
i admit i have ubuntu installed since gnewsense i couldnt get functioning
but once i learn coding in PC land, i'll be able to totally switch to free software
btw is there a gnu 680×0 simulator program?

gentoo is the way yo go
*to

The last 12 hours have shown me free software is the way to go

since if i can't find another amiga i'm going to just use some of my electronics skills and design a free 680×0 based hobbyist computer kit
since if i can't find another amiga i'm going to just use some of my electronics skills and design a free 680×0 based hobbyist computer kit

dunno

I totally miss Amiga land

blazemonger, could grab an old-school Mac…

why not install aros then?

even a Atari ST would do
it's just not the same…

okay

i know the Amiga hardware like the back of my hand that's the only reason

you could get an amiga, then

i've put ads in local paper before i got PC
are there any good graphical web browsers in PC besides dillo that are ligt weight but semi-graphical?
i know about the lynx and links family ..i like light weight browsers that don't have a billion options i don't need

The old firebird?

there's emacs w3, i guess
i think that has graphical support under xemacs

oh ok i remember that one
i ran that on my amiga actually

cool

a lot of gnu programs i ran on the amiga the gnu debugger

Well if emacs is considered "lightweight" then you could also consider amaya.

is amaya even maintained anymore?

Very much so.
…. more than "maintained" it's being actively developed.

what toolkit does it use?

?? toolkit???
hammer and chisel probably.

mm
that's good
interesting

oh
uses wx

i found that in ubuntu there's a window manager called AmiWM the Amiga Window Manager

Oh, you mean which widget set.

I think i found the window manager that suits me the best

yes

It has very little dependence on any underlying widget set.

well
ftp.w3.org isn't working
so screw it for nwo
now*
i'll get back to it another dya
day*

I beleive there are compile time options where you can choose gtk/athena/wx/…

oh goodness, my typing

But beyond using a Window, Menubar and dropdown menus, it has no use for widgets.

gtk is the way to go

thc is the way

pot is not good for you
it's not that bad though

im on it for trigeminal neuralgia(neuropathic pain)
its my medicine

haha
do you have a prescription?
it would be cool to have one
and a very good business

hehe
yah and fund the Free Universal Computing Kit
btw gnu chess is beautiful

btw, do you know if there's any way to escape unicode in gtk?
like… some shortcut to insert unicode chars by number

psyche_ever met a mildy autistic person
that was into programming
MIT's open courseware is great
..edu sites with nice math essays are beautiful

libervisco:

Azar, yes?

just a coincidence of nick or you who wrote: http://www.libervis.com/article/merging_open_source_and_free_software

yeah it's me

so you think that OS should now go hide under FS ?
because there was a serious reason of why they split from FS…

well a gradual shift could happen
which might mean a shift in their thinking as well

OS's thinking I hope

yes

we all hope so

I mean, the diffusion of the meaning of "Open Source" should be a sort of a wake up call for them

I just hope so but I don't really see them getting away from the table full of cakes so easily and accepting an auster diet

well me neither, but the gradual phaze out could happen within the surrounding community and media
mounting a growing pressure on changing the OSI itself in the end
perhaps.. I know the whole thing is actually quite outlandish to suggest, but.. I had to talk about it

I have been lingering around OSI in the past , thinking they were the "real deal" as a newbie in the non-ms world…. I have seen them growing into what they are now, I doubt they would want to change

I mean I think it had to be said
what are they really?
They don't even own "Open Source" as a trademark and are hence legally quite powerless in attempting to secure and enforce its meaning

open can mean many things
actually license agreements are so complex to follow that you need a lawyer

what's left is merely an organization that approves licenses as "Open Source" but which yet fails to keep the public meaning of that term adherent to its supposed definition

a group that started on the right foot and slowly moved in a very wrong direction…. the mundane temptation of the commercial corporations have infected them same way as diabetes attacks a sweets-loving person

hmm maybe
I really thought for a while that OSI was near dead.. it barely said a word in 2006
while FSF was making all the headlines

so their movement, and name is being abused by anyone because open source movement has been just reduced to a "seasonal fashion"

indeed

is not about the headlines, and now they can see that, is standing firm on the grounds upholding the rules

of course

OS allways blamed FS for being stiff and sticking too hard to the rules
when you want to _make_a_difference_ you don't just cave in pressure and build software similar with ms-windows or that run as ms-windows
to then be joked around by everyone
just because "the user"(aka the corporations) are demanding so

yeah

no wonder ms realized that OS is a joke and punches at it without fear
funny how ms even dares to confuse the userbase more with "look we are become open source too" while while will never even dare to touch a FS topic or name..

well they are in a process of learning, I think, and the biggest problem for them was the GPL which was of course produced by the FSFs strictness not Open Source's shallowness

and yeah, I love the "Free Software" label even sometimes might confuse some… but scares the hell of ms

they made some patent deals, then came GPLv3 and now they're figuring out something else "look, open source. they'll fall for us!"
they wont, but the trend followers will

yes distorting the ideas, ideals and truths

actually, MS never used "Open Source" for anything that doesn't comply to the OSI definition

licenses don't always work..
just like people drive without drivers licenses and never get caught

where we can see that the OSI definition can be abused by any….having a strong legal team

antrik, yes, but they use "Shared Source" and are now submitting a Shared Source license to be approved as Open Source, hence being the both, which opens up a convenient new option for them

and this shared Source isn't more like "let us share yours but you can't share mine without some conditions" ?
only when ms will open up theirs (and that maybe when they will go out of business website host = never)
they are using legal loopholes to defraud OSI

"Look, we are good guys, our Shared Source is now *cough*partly*cough* Open Source! Open Source ftw.." and then customers ask "wtf is open source now?" oh it's everything that has a source.. and shared source must be open source too
it's sooo easy to start mixing up the two when you have such a shallow perception of a term

ms isn't going out of business anytime soon

base users ignorance

they have too many $$
*much

Azar, exactly

and I personally blame OSI for not fighting harder to distance themselves of such abuses

well the problem is that their whole philosophy is based on laying themselves out to those abuses

now if OSI falls, is on them. I won't want to see FSF being dragged down by OSI's liabilities

they *wanted* a buzzword
and they went overboard with it

why is the gpl so damn complicated ? : /

they succeeded

OSI should stay where it is and fight to clean up its image..
I do not think is complicated, you could narrow it down to some few sentences

the license text is very big
compared to other licenses

well there is one argument to be made against renaming OSI, even if it renames people would still use the old term as if it still meant anything….
so it might be better for them to stay and fight for the term
but I'm not sure about the chances..

well free oss is nowhere dead

what's wrong with OSI?

OSI has become the laughter of the corporate monkeys

(which is why I suggested a phase out, not a sudden switch)

what exactly do you mean when you say "OSI" ?

blazemonger, it is losing its meaning in public perception, getting too trendy to be taken seriously as a term that stands for something specific

Open Source Institute, I'm guessing

although trendy isn't necessarily bad.. it is bad when a trendsetter loses control over it I suppose
micahcowan, Open Source Initiative (www.opensource.org)

Initiative, yeah, that's what I meant.

ok.. now that makes sense
i was thinking about the OSI model

psykon, thought so

well it is also a Free Software model

but what has it done?

libervisco, psykon is referring to the standard networking layers model

OSI for me is like the hippie culture that eventually died, FSF is there to stay….

i actually think rms boy is a bit too extreme

Azar, lol. There are a lot of people who seem to think the exact reverse, AFAICT

hehe

if you ask me i believe I have no right to force another indiviual to use a program whether foss or proprietary or plain open or shared source,

yeah OSI goes out with flowers, signs of peace etc etc… FSF goes out with lawyers

micahcowan, strangely enough FSFs image is largely improving recently, with the exception of RMS, of course

i believe the market should be left do decide since if that occurred, then free open source would boom

it's coming across as much more business friendly recently..

Which is okay, because RMS probably cares more about FSF's publish your images online than his own, anyway.

yeah

obviously

apparently

RMS seems to be a bit communistic but he's one of the good ones

look at his big gut

I never looked at FSF as if it was RMS…. in fact I never read articles about RMS…. even though he is mentioned here and there as a targed for mudslings…
uI never looked at FSF as if it was RMS…. in fact I never read articles about RMS…. even though he is mentioned here and there as a targed for mudslings…/u

blazemonger, no, I strongly doubt him being communist in any way

"communistic"… I hate when that term gets applied to RMS or FSF or FOSS or…

blazemonger, Free Software in fact *restores* true Free Market Capitalism

When I look at FSF I see more of Eben Moglen..

yeah

you can't have a Free Market without freedom in it

FSF and FOSS and GNU is more Libertarian to me

Because it's rather a gross misunderstanding of either FOSS or else of Communism, or else both.

FOSS is the opposite of communism

i'm a libertarian myself

Azar, yeah, Eben is a real hot shot

Though it might be argued that RMS might have chosen a better title for his famous missive than, "The GNU Manifesto"

FOSS is Libertarian Economics meet software
I say that that anti-trust lawsuit made microsoft stronger

most common error people make is focusing on a single person rather than a movement

micahcowan, what can ya say.. hacker humor

Azar, boy, that's the truth.

the ONLY reason I was against it was government doesn't need to intefere in a free market society
the free market works wonders and is the best tool against monopolies once it gets put to work

blazemonger, the whole point was, Microsoft was using their power to suppress the free market.

foss does appear to have a bright future

blazemonger, which in fact goes to suggest that Microsoft's "capitalism" is in fact much closer to communism than some may think
when you see an anomaly like MS develop… free market is seriously sick.. this ain't capitalism

if there is one movement that might be successful in fighting corporations that have full govt protection, that is FSF as long as it stays its grounds, and not OSI who is more likely to compromise and be tainted

They were telling distributors that they would no longer be allowed to distribute MS Windows under competitive terms, unless they refused to include Netscape.
(If that's the particular antitrust case to which you refer, there are several, obviously)

that i will say is right as a libertarian govt , religion and corps shouldnt be having three-somes

ever wonder why libertarians never got a minimal chance in govt?

why is that? what can change that?

"Save Capitalism! Buy Free Software!"

Azar, did you mean to address libervisco, or me?

beautiful libervisco!!!
Man I'm going to make a banner that says th at

hehe

should we really have to care about this anyway?

it's not enough to have good intentions, to succeed

this is lawyers job

libervisco, and then we'll spend the majority of our time explaining why the slogan really does make sense :p

Free Software is worth buying

micahcowan, ah well… as long as we get their attention

i'm a capitalist libervisco

I'd say I'm too

i'm going to invest in foss audio/midi sequencing software

I had a big misunderstanding at the beginning though
blazemonger, yay, that's what we need

and we can let the commie-minded steal it and do what they want..cuz we made our bank

and seeing how linus is all curling up to a decayed OSI, I decided to abandon linux as well

I really miss a good sequencer for electronic music production

let's go towards developing the Free Universal Computing Kit
and it will have a 68060 based processor

hehe

torwalds will become a 2nd gates

Torvalds is confused
he can lead coders
but politics?

yeah but dictatorial enough to be completely blinded

i dont know #*^& about politics

he himself says he is apolitical, although that in itself is a political statement

i only understand the Libertarian philosophy

gates was a "good boy" back in his heydays

the free market is the solution to everything

well, most of everything.. there sometimes needs to be a healthy does of intervention, but through true democracy

he knows better than any what the user wants

basically, in addition to voting with our wallets it would be nice to also be able to vote with our voices in a way that matters
so when wallets fail…

when someone, or a group of people start declaring that they know better what the user needs/wants: BEWARE, it smells like shit

hmm yeah, that reminds me of another controversy I participated in stirring
"fork a kernel"

heh yep. The fedora linux kernel is already riddled with software that are NOT free

not just that, it seems to have some performance issues for desktop users

and rushing version after another without thorough bug counting…

well this stems from CK quitting kernel development actually, but yes, non free stuff is another good reason for an eventual branching
it'd be interesting how Solaris develops if it gets under GPLv3
FSF would probably be touting it much more then

there are people out there working on free drivers as we speak…

yeah

CK left and torwalds RUSHED to explain the world CK's departure that sounds so stinky…
compose his face front of the world
is a success.
most of the anti-ms battle is won

but there is a larger anti-proprietary battle too
although MS is one of the biggest representations of it, of course
it's also moving to new areas, like mobile
just look at iPhone and contrast it with OpenMoko on Neo1973

"Practice Safe Sex: use Kingdoms"
it comes a little too late on the arena

yeah… Apple is actually a bigger player there now..
iPhone is supposedly the biggest product launch of the century

hmmm iPhone, iPod, cellphone…. nope never used, and will never use
because I do not need them

me neither, except for the cell phone
gonna probably buy Neo when it comes out though

gah… I don't need to be called while in the restroom, a conference, movies…

just switch it off then
or mute
(which is in fact obligatory on movies and such)

people can leave messages you know..

well.. yeah…
but mobility can be useful

this cell phone thing is maybe only for paranoid car salesmen
I still want to enjoy some hours/day of my life man

if you're stuck in a city, late for an appointment with someone, anything anywhere outside of home.. cell phone is extremely useful, but I guess it depends…

ihow do i set root directory to NEWROOT

blazemonger, what do you mean?

chroot

http://pastebin.com/m1270f114
im trying to set a fix
for clamav
wont install

What's that got to do with setting the root directory?

Why does the GFDL choose to prohibit distribution on DRMed media, whereas the GPL simply (and much more elegantly IMO) requires distribution on non-DRM media?
Why does the GFDL choose to prohibit distribution on DRMed media, whereas the GPL simply (and much more elegantly IMO) requires distribution on non-DRM media?
Doesn't the GPL allow distribution on DRMed media,as long as copies are available from non-DRM media?

Oh, i see what you're saying.
I'd have to look it up, but what you say sounds like it's probably true.
I didn't even know it had something in there for DRM.

ALso the way the GFDL phrases it NO copy may ever be subject to "technical measures to obstruct or control" reading and copying.
That's so broad… can I store GFDL documents on my hard drive with an encrypted filesystem?
Can I transfer a GFDL document over SSH?
And it's for reading to… that means it's not just distribution, but also private copies!

http://pastebin.com/m1270f114
mm
i dont understand this..in a chroot, (how do i get into a chroot and set root to newroot
then install a package

chroot /newroot/ /runme

chroot NEWROOT outta do it…
or, yeah, clever's version, too.

what i perfer to do
cd newroot;chroot . bin/bash
then i have a root shell
also the power of a livecd lets me do that to get a root shell on any pc(bypassing the password:P)
even a boot floppy would do to bypass the login and chroot to your drive:P

wont work

what error?
most stuff tells you why it wont work

lymeca, the relevant text in the GFDL is somewhat ambiguous, and IANAL, but my bet would be that section would be construed to apply only for copies made for the intent of distribution. Personal copies wouldn't need to follow that.
Also, I don't think it's meant to apply to, say, loading a GFDL-covered doc into an e-reader: I think it means actively trying to prevent copies that would otherwise be possible to make.
But it could be a lot clearer.

i dont understand still
;5~;5~;5~this chroot is confusing
im stoned too

chroot will run a program and set what / is to that program
'chroot newroot program' would run program and / would be newroot

cannabis is no excuse!
I do some of my best web hosting hacking with the aide of cannabis

ive never had drugs or beer
and so most of my programig at night

Why does that mean most of your programming is at night?
I definately don't drink alcohol.
And clever, I *highly* doubt you've never had psychoactive drugs before.

lol
never had weed or anything like that:P
!age
I am 20.383014 years old. (I'll be 21 in 32wks 2days 2hrs 26mins 55secs.)
uI am 20.383014 years old. (I'll be 21 in 32wks 2days 2hrs 26mins 55secs.)/u
lol /me wonders of mooseguy is a script

don't say you've never had drugs then, because that's not true. Also try not to characterise all psychoactive drugs as "like cannabis". There are next to NO psychoactive chemicals which are chemically similar to or exhibit similar effects of THC.

.
and i wouldnt knpw the effects of it since i havent had it

I could describe in some detail the effects of methamphetamine or heroin,and I've never had either of those.
Knowledge != experience

i know several people online who talk about it alot
one even asked me to make a !count script that would count down from 10 so he ad another could drink shots together:P

It seems to me you are greatly associating cannabis and ethanol use,which is a grave mistake. If you'd like to educate yourself a bit more on psychoactives so you don't have such a limited perception of them, I recommend www.erowid.org

that reminds me
i have a pdf somewhere explaining how to grow stronger weed
what parts have all the thc in them and how to make it produce more of it

i fixed the clamav by uninstalling it and then instaling it again

what's the command to reconfigure xserver?

Which server?

um gdm
I installed gNewSense on another machine and then put the HDD in this machine, which is why xserver wont run
?

gdm isn't a xserver. Try "dpkg-reconfigure xserver"

"package 'xserver' is not installed"

well whatever package it is then.

ill try "dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg"
ok

hi, I'm trying to learn about GPLv3

hokay

hello

hi, sorry I'm listening to the speech thing

hi crackhead

when I use gcc…how can I collapse multiple -L to one…such as -Lasdf -Lfoo
hello lc2

you can't

interesting

so, say hypothetically I have a computer program that controls the brakes in a motorized vechicle
and I want the program to be GPLv3
so someone modifies the code.. maybe not it isn't safe anymore
so I have to choose.. potentially kill people or use GPLv3

umm
that's a silly objection

why?

somebody could modify the proprietary program too

umm
that's like saying you shouldn't build cars with removable wheels

lindi-: maybe so, maybe not, it would be harder

because like, people can slacken off the wheel nuts
and hurt themselves
if people want to modify the braking system, let them, they can kill themselves

ok, fine let me just use the real example
you have software that controls the primary instruments in an aircraft
according to the FAA you are not allowed to let people modify the code

only machines can modify it then?

so the GPLv3 is illegal in this situation

Bullshit.

if you modify the code, it is deemed "experimental" and is in a different class

but isn't all code modified? :/
surely FAA could do some code review

yes they require extensive code review

and it might take time and money, and they might treat planes with reviewed revision differently

GPL is simply a license. It allows you to copy and modify code, without breaking copyright law.

it means that if you are the owner of the aircraft, there should not be technical restrictions to you loading a modified version of the control code into the aircraft

but i don't see what this has to do with free software :/

there is a restriction

it doesn't mean you have the right to modify the software on every aircraft you go onto
so what's the big fucking deal?

you can't even modify it on your own aircraft

hokay, whatever
if this is meant to be some argument against the GPLv3 i'm lost

well it isn't against it.. it is just that it is impossible to use GPLv3 on such code

It doesn't mean that you can (say) take a GPL covered program, use it to commit fraud, and then say the GPL was "illegal" because it allowed me to do that.

huh?

uh, no it isn't impossible
impractical, maybe, not impossible

surely you can use GPLv3, you just better let people know they need to get modifications reviewed

heh, indeed

lindi-: yes, the FAA isn't going to review individual changes
lindi-: but ok I think I see what you are saying.. that is true

and you could use it in a simulator

lindi-: that is a good point too

develop it there for three years and then submit it for review

In your particular scenario, the illegal thing, isn't modifying the code, but installing the modified version of the code into the aircraft.

yes without review

installing and flying
installing alone might be ok

I suppose it would be allowed if it were reviewed.. but I don't think the FAA will do that for individuals
but I haven't tried

individuals rarely have large jet planes

well any plane counts here
it need not be large

smallest ones don't have much software though?

I've got a Stanley Bailey plane.

lindi-: they do these days
so.. what about the case of wireless drivers that restrict transmission power?
that is clearly not in accordance to GPL because you cannot modify the code

Same thing. If it's GPL covered, GPL allows you to modify the software. Using the software is another matter.

well my understanding is the distributors are afraid of being sued by the FCC for making it easy to violate laws
or something like that.. maybe not exactly that

GPL (or any software licence) neither prohibits nor permits use of the software.

that's a myth
the fcc don't care

well I don't understand why they do not distribute source then

The same reason why any proprietary software company doesn't distribute source.
They want to keep control of it.

they are afraid of being sued for patent infringement?

microsoft already using OSI to promote their agendas

Agenda!!
There's no such word as "agendas"…. one agendum, two agenda

agenda, agendae?

I don't understand why microsoft isn't open source.. they are already really rich they have nothing to lose

enough to make one hate OSI as a sham it is
Microsofts involvement in Linux companies and the Open Source community can be used as an illusion that Microsoft has itself become a big fan of openness, transparency, collaboration, and standards..
OSI in fact was just helping Microsoft to get a new, shiny face
stupidity hurts

every os they come out with is actually worse than the previous one.. I don't get that either.. oh well

You can put lipstick on a pig, wrap it up with a red dress and then take it out for dinner, but the pig is still a pig, not a girlfriend

well the pig keeps getting fatter

some ubuntu servers were compromised, softwarefreedomday page is down
meh it looks like Torwalds came out more rabid than Microsoft on the GPLv3 thing…
Open Sourcers are bleeding

hi gnudists

hi jemarch

I've a question about the GPL license used for GNU Projects
If I develop a UI for a GPLed GNU command line program and I commercially distribute my UI as closed source and I include in the installer the free GPL software, do I need to disclose the source code of my UI as well? No changes to the command line GNU software would be made by me.

So, your UI will just run the command line program with params from the UI?

yes, plus a few extra functions of my own like my own tutorials in the helper, web integration, etc…

so, your UI doesn't require the GNU program to run, but is useless without it? Which GNU program is this?

Gnu Octave

so, what will your UI do?

Does the license grant me the privilege to use the program in this way?
just make it easy to use Octave
automated scripting with lots of scripts out of the box

i don't think that'll be a problem, though i have to wonder if people will want your proprietary UI.
there are already projects that provide some kind of UI, that are free software.

well, I won't market it as a front end to Octave for geeks. Geeks will still use the command line.
I will market as a numeric solver, and have a "Powered by Octave in the About" plus the GPL license portion in my license agreement

well, i don't think geeks are a target anyway, i mean.. why expect people to install proprietary software?

exactly. I'm not targeting Linux users. I'm targeting high school kids or early college students who need a super easy UI or they won't be able to use the program.

okay, so why not give those people the freedom to improve upon your work?

i remember when i was in that situation and everyone told me to get proprietary software, including the professor
then i found maxima (and wxmaxima)
i wish at least somebody would have told me about it bit sooner

because I need to make a living off programming my software

you need to make a living, certainly. does that mean you need to make a money by making proprietary software?

writing software is my skill and I like to work for myself. Selling software as an indipendent software vendor is a viable solution. Does the open source model provide me with a valid solution to make money as well?

sure. plenty of people make money from free software…

is there some nice free octace gui in development btw?

I'm interested. Please note that I don't want to make money by providing technical support, consulting, or anything like that. I mainly want to make money writing my own software. If you can show me how it is possible to give away my software for free, including the source code, and still
make money off of it, I'm super interested in hearing this.

i'd pay 10-80 EUR for a nice free octave gui

lindi-: so I guess what you mean, is the concept of donationware? Accepting donations while releasing the software for free?

i was thinking more about escrow, people promise to pay XX if they get YY in ZZ months

not even that. find people who are interested in buying it, and sell them binaries, packaged, with installers, etc…

and you could have 10 students who all would like to have the program
and they don't need to pay until they actually get the program

all the nice stuff, packaged for Windows or Macintosh or whatever, and just give them the source code with the application.
you don't need to give _everyone_ the code, only the people who buy your application. but you can still release it as GPL.

would you buy a program that is commercial but released under GPL?

sure. why wouldn't i?

so you are advocating free software (as in speech) more than in as in beer

the fact that it's free software would be a great reason to buy it.
yes, when we speak of free software (especially in #gnu), that is what we mean

but couldn't the competition copy the code and package it up for their own business?

sure

sure, but it would be GPL, so you'd be able to take any improvements and sell those, too.

could you provide me with a few companies names or products that adopted the GPL commercial way?

MySQL.

I get a feeling that proprietary, closed source software may be a bit "evil"

I think they made like $10 million in sales last year.

are mysql products free software?

certainly are, aren't they?
also, why aren't you in germany?

I didn't think what mysql sold was free software
and why would I be in germany?

http://events.ccc.de/camp/2007/

oh good grief no.

heh, its quite fun… hoping to spread the good word here.

it's a ghetto, man

hah.

that's how they track you, dude - they put stuff in the water there

had any more people join gnu pdf?

hacking on anything over there?

not a lot. meeting some cool people though. just met the guy from April, the French FS group.

Soo…. anybody have any comments about MySQL AB decided not to release the source of the Enterprice server anymore?

did they ever?