April 2002 - main

Re: [Alug] linux laptops
by Ricardo Campos 26 Apr '02

26 Apr '02

> >Unless something has changed, Darwin is *not* Open Source in the OSI sense, > >ie it is not Free Software (free as in freedom). Isn't it a BSD-style license? I'm really undecided as to which I feel is 'better', as I find one more ethically acceptable, and the other more economically viable. But then I'm neither an expert on ethics or economics! > Find an x86 > machine at the same price as an Apple one and you'll probably find that > the performance/features are about equal. I agree with that wholeheartedly, at least it has been so in the past. > As for freedom, I can't say as i'm in much of a position to go hacking > around with any of OS X at the moment, plus, i can run linux on it if I > want (SuSE, Debian, Yellow Dog, Mandrake). I have to say Rob's demo of OS X really made my jaw drop. In terms of functionality,ease of use and integration, it is exactly what people want. I think Linux has a lot to learn from OS X, certainly if anyone wants it to work as a successful desktop OS. I don't think that it's any coincidence that most of the people I have met who use linux are 1)in education/research, 2) hackers (I mean programmers), 3) people who work in technical jobs, network admins etc. 4) people who have *time*. And I would admit this; if my girlfriend needed to buy a computer, I would recommend an iMac. She is artistic, not technical, she doesn't enjoy hacking computers, and she wants to take it out of the box, connect it up and start using it. Besides which, I can go exploring the BSD underneath when she's not looking ;-) Of course I wouldn't recommend M$ X-pee-pee. -- Get your free email from www.linuxmail.org Powered by Outblaze

3 8

Re: [Alug] linux laptops
by xs＠kittenz.org 26 Apr '02

26 Apr '02

on Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 05:07:22PM +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > > > If I want to link a program with a closed source, patent-ridden, > > maggot-eaten library, isn't that up to me? After all, I don't have > > to distribute that linked program, nor the source modifications, if > > there are any. > > It's not at all clear to me that the GPL (assuming that's what you're > moaning about) actually prohibits you from doing this. Well, the last bit of /usr/src/linux/COPYING says: This General Public License does not permit incorporating your program into proprietary programs. If your program is a subroutine library, you may consider it more useful to permit linking proprietary applications with the library. If this is what you want to do, use the GNU Library General Public License instead of this License. and then http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWritingFSWithNFLibs *shrug* > Furthermore, I believe you could distribute the modified source under > section 2, even though it would only be useful in conjunction with a > non-free library. Until there was a free version of the library (motif/lessif..) > >> Nothing requires a developer to use the "or any later version" > >> clause in their declaration, but many do. > > > > And GNU doesn't explicitly say you can leave it out. Many people > > writing software for free, can't afford lawyers. > > I think they can employ common sense though. Courts can't necessarily.

1 0

Re: [Alug] Mac OS X, *BSD and GPL
by Ricardo Campos 26 Apr '02

26 Apr '02

> IMHO, wanting to twiddle and code stuff doesn't make you a nerd, or even > abnormal. hmmm.... I disagree I think, at least at home. If you mean adjusting your desktop wallpaper and having themes for XMMS/KDE/Sawfish/etc. then I agree. If you mean fiddling with config files, for days and days and days (not to mention recompiling kernels etc) just to get one peripheral working, then I disagree. In respects to business/research use, no it is not abnormal at all. Other than my left of left wing politics, my frustrations with administering Lotus Notes/SQL Server/NT, led me to Linux. "But WHY can't I change it??????" > Any fool can program, and most do. You're trolling, right? The only way I can make sense of this statement, is that you find programming easy, and that you only hang out with programmers. Outside of ALUG I only know 2 people who program, both of which are professional programmers. I know at least 100 people who use computers... (not to mention the 300 users I have on my network) >The idea is making the > -option- of Free Software available to as many of the 'want out of box > solution' > crowd, while making it clear that you don't really need to be a 'nerd' to > work with a Free system. I was never disputing that. Most of this tweaking wouldn't be needed if you could buy a pooter with a GNU/Linux installation pre-installed and preconfigured for your hardware. What I am disputing is the assumption that everyone will find GNU/Linux easy to use, install and maintain. I am only now confident after what, 7 months of using it. I install debian, and realise I'm gonna have to spend more free time learning *that*, cos everything is sufficiently different from my last distro. (If the weather gets better then that's just not going to happen!) And anyway, being a'nerd' is "cool" these days. ;) -- Get your free email from www.linuxmail.org Powered by Outblaze

4 3

Re: [Alug] Mac OS X, *BSD and GPL
by Ricardo Campos 26 Apr '02

26 Apr '02

Well, we're going round in semantic/political circles now. When it comes to general world-view as to people's ethical inclinations, feel free to e-mail me off-list. > Fair enough. In time, you'll learn never to make a point about licencing > within earshot of Mark :-) Yes, but I enjoy him putting on his Stallman/Jesus beard (although I am not suggesting Jesus was caucasian like Stallman). And I like playing devil's advocate. Besides which, I value the points made in the debate. Oh yeah, and it's friday, and no-one phones tech support on friday. If all the routers went down, people would just go home rather than bother calling us. So I have time on my hands. ;) -- Get your free email from www.linuxmail.org Powered by Outblaze

2 1

Mac OS X, *BSD and GPL
by Ricardo Campos 26 Apr '02

26 Apr '02

#Sets subject to the new branch of this thread >I think you have a different objective for economics >to me. Possibly, possibly not. I made no mention of *my* ideals, it wasn't the point I was making. The point I was making is that the majority of people *prefer* the capitalistic way. I think GPL is too radical to be practical (regardless of whether I believe it's the the right way or not), since there are a lot of fat cats to persuade... >I want a free and fair market, I do too. I find capitalism to be coercive and unfair. I prefer small companies to have the freedom to compete, rather than a single monopoly. >while it sounds like you want a way for companies to >grow fat from cheap/free labour of programmers. Not me. But most companies DO. </snipped out my personal politics rant!> >> I don't think that it's any coincidence that most of the people I have met >> who use linux are .... > >Maybe it's just that we become one of the above, >empowered by the ability to do so? Errr... yes/no. Yes, in the sense that I, for example, have just applied for an MSc in Software Development (mostly OO stuff) and my last degree was in Pharmacology- I attribute my wish to code as 99.999% due to GNU/Linux. It has absoloutely nothing to do with their 32 processor Beowulf cluster, honest. But then, I was already working in IT, and I never (well, maybe once a month) watch TV, so when the pub's not an option, I'm fiddling with my computer, or reading a book. I am far from normal. I am a nerd. No, as most people don't have the time, intelligence or the patience (particularly the patience) to fiddle with their computer. They want it to be as easy and convenient as a TV, although I'll be buggered if I understand how my parents digital TV works. Basically, I was making a point of practicality for the BSD licence, rather than an idealistic or personal one. So, who's for Microsoft Windows BSD-XP? ;) -- Get your free email from www.linuxmail.org Powered by Outblaze

4 3

Re: Mac OS X, *BSD and GPL
by MJ Ray 26 Apr '02

26 Apr '02

Ricardo: > Possibly, possibly not. I made no mention of *my* ideals, it wasn't the > point I was making. The point I was making is that the majority of people > *prefer* the capitalistic way. I think GPL is too radical to be practical > (regardless of whether I believe it's the the right way or not), since > there are a lot of fat cats to persuade... Capitalism is a system based on general private ownership of capital, not the modern phenomenon of consolidation of that capital in the hands of a few people. Indeed, that is usually called an oligopoly and is not the normal outcome of a fair market, so presence of such a situation is normally regarded as just cause for intervention. GPL probably is too radical: it's far more capitalistic than our system. > Basically, I was making a point of practicality for the BSD licence, > rather than an idealistic or personal one. As was I. The BSD licence allows anyone to attempt to pervert the market by fencing off their patch of the commons. As the commons in this situation is infinite, normal fencing is inadequate. Each market being fenced off is infinite and that isn't permitted by a capitalist system. That's why copyrights and patents expire eventually: if they do not, they cannot exist in a capitalist system. -- MJR

1 0

Re: [Alug] Mac OS X, *BSD and GPL
by Jenny_Hopkins＠toby-churchill.com 26 Apr '02

26 Apr '02

Ricardo wrote: >So I have time on my hands. That was a foolish admission. You know that poster??? :-) (Linux Install Day folk never got back to me) Jen

1 0

RE: [Alug] binary symbols
by alasdair.i.macleod＠bt.com 26 Apr '02

26 Apr '02

try reset<CR> you may not see what you're typing but it should work. -----Original Message----- From: Jenny_Hopkins(a)toby-churchill.com [mailto:Jenny_Hopkins@toby-churchill.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 9:38 AM To: main(a)lists.alug.org.uk Subject: [Alug] binary symbols Hi list, I'm constantly opening binary files using cat from the command line by mistake, then after quitting out the console displays all text in weird symbols. Is there anyway to reset the console when this happens? Thanks, Jen. _______________________________________________ main(a)lists.alug.org.uk http://www.anglian.lug.org.uk/ http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!

1 0

SCSI woes
by John Freeman 26 Apr '02

26 Apr '02

I've been stuck in a conundrum with trying to play audio CD's as a normal user (works perfect as root). Recently I had to change the way my ATAP CD/RW was probed at boot time. I am now using SCSI emulation, whereby /dev/cdrom now points to sr0 rather than /dev/hdd. lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 3 Apr 24 19:37 /dev/cdrom -> sr0 brw-rw---- 1 root disk 11, 0 Apr 13 1999 sr0 brw-rw---- 1 root disk 11, 0 Apr 24 19:25 scd0 The user in question *is* a member of the disk group, so the read/write permissions are correct. Is there another reason why I get the following error with cdparanoia: /dev/cdrom exists but isn't accessible. By default, cdparanoia stops searching for an accessible drive here. Consider using -sv to force a more complete autosense of the machine. More information about /dev/cdrom: Checking /dev/cdrom for cdrom... Testing /dev/cdrom for cooked ioctl() interface /dev/sr0 is not a cooked ioctl CDROM. Testing /dev/cdrom for SCSI interface No generic SCSI device found to match CDROM device /dev/sr0 *The same error still occurs if /dev/cdrom points to /dev/sdc0 too -John Freeman-

3 6

Converting files to pdf???
by Dryden 25 Apr '02

25 Apr '02

I need to try converting kword files to pdf any idea's? Would installing open office doit?... Dennis Dryden ********************************************************************** IMPORTANT: This email and its attachments are intended for the addressee only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please telephone us immediately. The contents of this email and attachments represent the views of the sender and are not necessarily the representative of the views of The College of West Anglia **********************************************************************

3 2