- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
GPLv3 on the Novell-Microsoft Patent Agreement
|
|
|
Comments (48)
She makes one big (and wrong) assumption
24 earlier comments in the full thread.
> I just booted from CD
The mepis or the gparted live CD? If you're still using the mepis one, I'd get the (newer) gparted live.
It is possible that the other management software is using some sort of encription, but, I doubt it. More likely a bios setting. You want to make sure nothing's locked with that.
The mepis or the gparted live CD? If you're still using the mepis one, I'd get the (newer) gparted live.
It is possible that the other management software is using some sort of encription, but, I doubt it. More likely a bios setting. You want to make sure nothing's locked with that.
Abe: I believe Mepis RC3 now has gparted (what they were using before was a piece of crap). My wife has a new Compaq laptop, Mepis RC3 was the only live cd that had wireless working out of the box.
If the Mepis live cd recognizes the XP partition, you probably want to go with that.
If the Mepis live cd recognizes the XP partition, you probably want to go with that.
Have been checking on Altiris, and it would seem that they just image an install similar to Ghost. I don't see anything that would indicate special encryption, just lots and lots of remote spyware access. Wow, that outfit makes MS look like a sweetheart.
Quoting:The mepis or the gparted live CD?
Gparted v0.3.4-5 (latest) ISO which I downloaded from Source Forge, burned and booted. During the boot sequence, the drive hda is detected but QParted doesn't see it. It is possible that Altiris is protecting the drive some how.
Quoting:If the Mepis live cd recognizes the XP partition, you probably want to go with that.
Mepis does boot fine and everything works great from LiveCD, but no, Mepis doesn't see XP partition (whole disk).
I will research it a little more. I am going to try Knoppix which usually has very good hardware detection.
Thanks,
Quoting:Wow, that outfit makes MS look like a sweetheart.
Yes I know. The same happened with my previous laptop and I ended up wiping XP. But this time I have to keep it.
I am looking at couple Windows based partition managers. I think this is probably the best way going around it.
I would be interested to hear what you find out. I've not heard of such a thing.
Another option is to install Ubuntu in XP without repartitioning https://wiki.ubuntu.com/install.exe/Prototype
Another option is to install Ubuntu in XP without repartitioning https://wiki.ubuntu.com/install.exe/Prototype
If you can find a version of PQmagic, that usually works, However, only use it on the actual xp partition and resizing. You really need to touch that up with gparted afterword.
> Another option is to install Ubuntu in XP without repartitioning
What an obscenity....
I'd be interested in what the new live Debian does with this.
> Another option is to install Ubuntu in XP without repartitioning
What an obscenity....
I'd be interested in what the new live Debian does with this.
I tried Mepis again and it seems like it is working. I am in the process of formatting now. I know I am taking a risk, but the heck, I can have XP installed again if I need to.
Any, in Mepis QParted, there an option to select a drive there were two entries one sd0 and the other is /etc/sd0. when I selected sd0 it should be the XP used area. I was able to re-size it and add three more partitions (or in the process of, not sure it is going to work but it seems like it is). I create root (10GB), Swap (2GB), and home (17GB). I will let you know how it goes.
If it works, congratulation is in order for Mepis/Warren.
Any, in Mepis QParted, there an option to select a drive there were two entries one sd0 and the other is /etc/sd0. when I selected sd0 it should be the XP used area. I was able to re-size it and add three more partitions (or in the process of, not sure it is going to work but it seems like it is). I create root (10GB), Swap (2GB), and home (17GB). I will let you know how it goes.
If it works, congratulation is in order for Mepis/Warren.
Just a note here. With anything 1GB of ram or over, I'd never have over a 1GB swap... maybe even 512meg. My guess is that with 2GB of ram, you'll 'never ever' hit swap, I barely ever use it with 1GB.
Congratulation to Mepis/Warren, everything seems to work fine. I was able to boot XP and Linux. I am writing this post from Mepis 6.5RC3. What is annoying is, when I boot XP, it wants to put its stamp on the new partitions and it gives you 10 secs to terminate. I have to catch it before it does. I remember having this issue while back and was able to get rid of it. I am not sure what it was but will take care of it in case I forget about it and XP ruins the day.
Jim, I understand about the swap but I just gave it enough at least to cover the 2GB memory. I am sure that will change.
Everything seems ok except the mouse is not working but the mouse pad is (I don like mouse pads). Network (obviously) worked, sound, battery seem to be working good.
Rigg,
I Didn't find any Free ones and that is why I went back to try Mepis.
Time to resolve mouse and check other things.
Thanks guys for your tips.
Jim, I understand about the swap but I just gave it enough at least to cover the 2GB memory. I am sure that will change.
Everything seems ok except the mouse is not working but the mouse pad is (I don like mouse pads). Network (obviously) worked, sound, battery seem to be working good.
Quoting:I would be interested to hear what you find out.
Rigg,
I Didn't find any Free ones and that is why I went back to try Mepis.
Time to resolve mouse and check other things.
Thanks guys for your tips.
what kind of mouse? i.e. make, model, connection.
Quoting:what kind of mouse? i.e. make, model, connection.
It is a Kensington Optical Elite, Model # 72121, USB with wheel. I am downloading available upgrades, hopefully this will take care of it along with the missing virtual desktops that are missing from the panel. If it doesn't resolve, I will try configuring manually.
Well mouse is working after either the upgrade or the reboot. Virtual desktops are still not showing up in the panel.
For a usb mouse, /etc/X11/xorg.conf should have a mouse configuration like this:
Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Configured Mouse" Driver "mouse" Option "CorePointer" Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice" Option "Protocol" "ImPS/2" Option "Emulate3Buttons" "true" EndSection
That should work for any optical usb.
Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Configured Mouse" Driver "mouse" Option "CorePointer" Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice" Option "Protocol" "ImPS/2" Option "Emulate3Buttons" "true" EndSection
That should work for any optical usb.
Virtual desktop were set not to show by default, used add to the panel to add them and they are there now.
It is basketball time now. I will post later if I encounter any new issues.
> I'd be interested in what the new live Debian does with this.
You can install Debian without repartitioning the hard drive?
You can install Debian without repartitioning the hard drive?
> You can install Debian without repartitioning the hard drive?
Of course not. Same as with Mepis. You'd still have to repartition.
Of course not. Same as with Mepis. You'd still have to repartition.
They're missing some paragraphs
"The company certainly can't any longer after this pretend that the deal has not affected how it is viewed by the FOSS community"
When did Novell make that claim? Anyway, I think they need to add a comment on the Ubuntu ShipIt program. About Novell/Microsoft, they write
> The basic harm that such an agreement can do is to make the free software subject to it effectively proprietary. This result occurs to the extent that users feel compelled, by the threat of the patent, to get their copies in this way.... We take the threat seriously, and we have decided to act to block such threats, and to reduce their potential to do harm.
That same logic of "users feel compelled" also applies to the ShipIt program as well. Here's the proposed wording:
The basic harm such a program can do is to make the free software effectively proprietary. This result occurs to the extent that users feel compelled, by the convenience and low cost of the program, to get their copies in this way.... We take the program seriously, and we have decided to act to block such programs, and to reduce their potential to do harm.
And the nightmare that is the OLPC as well:
The basic harm such a program can do is to make the free software effectively proprietary. This result occurs to the extent that users feel compelled, by the convenience and low cost of the program, to get their copies in this way.... We take the program seriously, and we have decided to act to block such programs, and to reduce their potential to do harm.
Thus, unless the Ubuntu ShipIt program is willing to offer the same free CD shipping for all distributions, and governments are willing to provide the choice of any distribution on the OLPC computers, they will now be in violation of the GPL.
As is well known, gifts are always and everywhere a bad thing. We will be changing our name to the Equal Software Foundation, because it's a matter of all users experiencing software equality rather than software freedom.
Future changes will be added to prohibit the installation of pretty icons by default, as pretty icons will compel users to adopt that particular distribution, at the expense of other distributions.
When did Novell make that claim? Anyway, I think they need to add a comment on the Ubuntu ShipIt program. About Novell/Microsoft, they write
> The basic harm that such an agreement can do is to make the free software subject to it effectively proprietary. This result occurs to the extent that users feel compelled, by the threat of the patent, to get their copies in this way.... We take the threat seriously, and we have decided to act to block such threats, and to reduce their potential to do harm.
That same logic of "users feel compelled" also applies to the ShipIt program as well. Here's the proposed wording:
The basic harm such a program can do is to make the free software effectively proprietary. This result occurs to the extent that users feel compelled, by the convenience and low cost of the program, to get their copies in this way.... We take the program seriously, and we have decided to act to block such programs, and to reduce their potential to do harm.
And the nightmare that is the OLPC as well:
The basic harm such a program can do is to make the free software effectively proprietary. This result occurs to the extent that users feel compelled, by the convenience and low cost of the program, to get their copies in this way.... We take the program seriously, and we have decided to act to block such programs, and to reduce their potential to do harm.
Thus, unless the Ubuntu ShipIt program is willing to offer the same free CD shipping for all distributions, and governments are willing to provide the choice of any distribution on the OLPC computers, they will now be in violation of the GPL.
As is well known, gifts are always and everywhere a bad thing. We will be changing our name to the Equal Software Foundation, because it's a matter of all users experiencing software equality rather than software freedom.
Future changes will be added to prohibit the installation of pretty icons by default, as pretty icons will compel users to adopt that particular distribution, at the expense of other distributions.
> When did Novell make that claim?
In various interviews. They claimed 90% support from the FOSS community since only about 10% openly spoke against it.
I'm not going to comment on the rest of your post.
In various interviews. They claimed 90% support from the FOSS community since only about 10% openly spoke against it.
I'm not going to comment on the rest of your post.
Are you saying that users are compelled to get a free Ubuntu CD because of the convenience or cost? That's hardly the same thing as patent aggression. The same could be said about my Zenwalk distro having to come all the way from France but my Slackware is mirrored here in Colorado. I don't think it's necessary (or even possible) for everyone to distribute everyone elses distro.
My view is that the free cd is a particularly user friendly method of distribution for those who do not have broadband or those poor weenie-dos users whose registry has been sabotaged by Microsoft to become clueless on how to burn an .iso file. Just another distribution method. The fact that Mark Shuttleworth is willing to pay the cost plus postage is immaterial.
My view is that the free cd is a particularly user friendly method of distribution for those who do not have broadband or those poor weenie-dos users whose registry has been sabotaged by Microsoft to become clueless on how to burn an .iso file. Just another distribution method. The fact that Mark Shuttleworth is willing to pay the cost plus postage is immaterial.
> Are you saying that users are compelled to get a free Ubuntu CD because of the convenience or cost?
Are you saying users are compelled to use Novell's offerings because of the patent deal?
> That's hardly the same thing as patent aggression.
No kidding. Patent aggression is worse than the cost of downloading and burning a CD. That's what's so puzzling about the revised GPL and the comments that were made afterward.
I can't understand why they wrote patent aggression into the GPL. It would make sense to me if they had prohibited patent aggression. What would be unacceptable behavior would be Novell paying Microsoft to sue Red Hat customers. Instead they rewrote the GPL to make it a violation of the license to reduce the probability of a patent lawsuit. The companies that actually have the resources to fight a company like Microsoft are now prohibited from protecting anyone else. Apparently some must view patent aggression as a good thing to write GPLv3 as they have.
To be honest, I know why it has been written like this. What they really want is to write a clause that says "You are prohibited from distributing GPL software if you make any kind of agreement at all with Microsoft." It's obvious to everyone that a statement like that would be so silly as to make the GPL irrelevant. So as a compromise, they were willing to accept patent aggression in return for getting rid of some deals with Microsoft.
I'm also concerned that this sets an ugly precedent. The GPL's current language is not important because the language can be changed anytime you get on the wrong side of Richard Stallman. I'm sure businesses will be lining up to adopt the GPL. At least if they write their own license they can control what goes into it. This should do wonders for anyone hoping to see open drivers. "You have a video card that only supports Windows? We'll change the GPL again so that you either provide open drivers for all hardware or no hardware!"
Are you saying users are compelled to use Novell's offerings because of the patent deal?
> That's hardly the same thing as patent aggression.
No kidding. Patent aggression is worse than the cost of downloading and burning a CD. That's what's so puzzling about the revised GPL and the comments that were made afterward.
I can't understand why they wrote patent aggression into the GPL. It would make sense to me if they had prohibited patent aggression. What would be unacceptable behavior would be Novell paying Microsoft to sue Red Hat customers. Instead they rewrote the GPL to make it a violation of the license to reduce the probability of a patent lawsuit. The companies that actually have the resources to fight a company like Microsoft are now prohibited from protecting anyone else. Apparently some must view patent aggression as a good thing to write GPLv3 as they have.
To be honest, I know why it has been written like this. What they really want is to write a clause that says "You are prohibited from distributing GPL software if you make any kind of agreement at all with Microsoft." It's obvious to everyone that a statement like that would be so silly as to make the GPL irrelevant. So as a compromise, they were willing to accept patent aggression in return for getting rid of some deals with Microsoft.
I'm also concerned that this sets an ugly precedent. The GPL's current language is not important because the language can be changed anytime you get on the wrong side of Richard Stallman. I'm sure businesses will be lining up to adopt the GPL. At least if they write their own license they can control what goes into it. This should do wonders for anyone hoping to see open drivers. "You have a video card that only supports Windows? We'll change the GPL again so that you either provide open drivers for all hardware or no hardware!"
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
I think I know what is going on. At my company we use Altiris Desktop Management utilities and it might have something to do with it. Or It might just be a trick HP is playing with MS!!! lol.
I will research it, and thanks for the tip.