Re: [ALUG] Redhat 6.0 discs
<<If anyone starts up an archive, I've also got Mandrake 7.0 :) Tony>> And I've got SUSE 8.2. Not /that/ old but still. Bev. -- _______________________________________________ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:50:37 +0100 "Bev Nicolson" <bnicolson@operamail.com> allegedly wrote:
<<If anyone starts up an archive, I've also got Mandrake 7.0 :) Tony>>
And I've got SUSE 8.2. Not /that/ old but still. Bev.
Hmmm. Any copyright lawyers or other legal beagles out there? Whilst I'm pretty sure that there would be no problem in someone hosting an archive of the /source/ of all relevant packages covered by one of the many public licences, I seem to recall that one of the Linux redistributors (LinuxEmprium or CheapBytes or someone) or had a problem reselling (for the nominal cost of copying) copies of binary Redhat disks 6 or 7 years ago and had to rename the distro to avoid Redhat lawyers. Before setting up an archive, it might be worth considering legal implications. Mick --------------------------------------------------------------------- The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this? Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:36:41PM +0100, mick wrote:
Hmmm. Any copyright lawyers or other legal beagles out there? Whilst I'm pretty sure that there would be no problem in someone hosting an archive of the /source/ of all relevant packages covered by one of the many public licences, I seem to recall that one of the Linux redistributors (LinuxEmprium or CheapBytes or someone) or had a problem reselling (for the nominal cost of copying) copies of binary Redhat disks 6 or 7 years ago and had to rename the distro to avoid Redhat lawyers.
I think that was related to when Redhat Enterprise Linux was released, as they wrote into the license that you couldn't use their logos or name when you redistributed it as they are Redhats' trademarks etc. so the distributors like cheapbytes released pink tie linux (iirc). I think part of the problem relates that to preserve a trademark you have to enforce it so no idea if this was Redhat being specifically evil or not. Adam -- jabberid = quinophex@jabber.earth.li
2009/4/21 Bev Nicolson <bnicolson@operamail.com>:
<<If anyone starts up an archive, I've also got Mandrake 7.0 :) Tony>>
And I've got SUSE 8.2. Not /that/ old but still. Bev.
Hah! I have SuSE 6.4 CDs. The originally pressed ones (all 6 of them), and a box, and the lovely manual. :) I've noticed that Slackware 4.0 is from May 1999... Anyone got a some spare floppy disks? ;) Srdjan
Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
2009/4/21 Bev Nicolson <bnicolson@operamail.com>:
<<If anyone starts up an archive, I've also got Mandrake 7.0 :) Tony>>
And I've got SUSE 8.2. Not /that/ old but still. Bev.
Hah! I have SuSE 6.4 CDs. The originally pressed ones (all 6 of them), and a box, and the lovely manual. :)
I've noticed that Slackware 4.0 is from May 1999... Anyone got a some spare floppy disks? ;)
Srdjan
_______________________________________________ main@lists.alug.org.uk http://www.alug.org.uk/ http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!
Running out of punched cards again? ;)
participants (5)
-
Adam Bower -
Bev Nicolson -
mick -
Srdjan Todorovic -
steveydoteu