Ben Woodard | 2 Dec 19:37 2003
Picon

Re: Red Hat, crappy RPMS not complying with the GPL?

Strange. It works for me.
Building the kernel rpm is kind of a trickly thing. There may be some
sort of problem on your system which makes it not work.

-ben

On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 08:52, Ragnar Hojland Espinosa wrote:
> The silly question of the day.  
> 
> I was attempting to compile the SRPMS for RHAS 2.1.  Fun fun.  tetex
> doesnt work, none of the 2.4.18s work, due to RPM breakage. Sayyy:
> 
> MAKEFLAGS=-j3 rpm --rebuild kernel-2.4.18-e.37.src.rpm
> [...]
> 
> + patch -p1 -s
> The next patch would delete the file
> drivers/message/fusion/mptlinux.txt,
> which does not exist!  Assume -R? [n] y
> The next patch would delete the file
> drivers/message/fusion/t10.org/asc-num.txt,
> which does not exist!  Assume -R? [n] y
> + echo 'Patch #2510 (linux-2.5-stack-random.patch):'
> Patch #2510 (linux-2.5-stack-random.patch):
> + patch -p1 -s
> + echo 'Patch #2520 (linux-2.4.18-ipc.patch):'
> Patch #2520 (linux-2.4.18-ipc.patch):
> + patch -p1 -s
> + echo 'Patch #2530 (linux-2.4.20-nethashfix.patch):'
> Patch #2530 (linux-2.4.20-nethashfix.patch):
(Continue reading)

Don Marti | 2 Dec 19:46 2003

USELINUX call for papers

Attention elitists: get your proposals in now.  That is all.

Call for Speakers/Proposals: USELINUX

USELINUX will be one (or possibly two) day special interest track
hosted as part of the 2004 USENIX Annual Technical Conference in
Boston (June 27 through July 2, 2004).  The focus of USELINUX, as the
name implies, will be on showcasing ways in which creative members of
the Linux community are making use of Linux --- on the desktop, in
embedded applications, in corporate data centers, in retail
environments --- the possibilities are endless!

We are soliciting proposals for presentations covering any of the
following topics:

             * Linux advocacy --- quantifying Linux TCO/ROI advantages
             * Linux adoption in lesser developed countries
             * Development tools and GUI libraries for embedded Linux
             * Technologies which enable the use of Linux
                         - desktop technologies
                         - file format conversions
                         - integration with legacy Unix and Windows
                           operating systems
             * Case studies
                         - Using Linux in Business
                         - Commercial uses of free software
                         - Using Linux in network infrastructure 
                           and telephony
                         - Cluster applications using Linux
                         - Embedded Linux applications
(Continue reading)

Rick Moen | 3 Dec 01:12 2003

sarge

[Sorry about breaking threading.  I deleted the original.]

Modus Operandi <modus <at> as220.org> wrote:

> I heard a rumor on #debian that soon -- possibly in December -- the
> sarge branch of debian would become the new stable branch.

It was obvious to all that the original Dec. 1 target date was more a
motivator than an actual target.  

> Anybody here know more about this? What dealbreakers are holding sarge
> back from "stable" status?

Here's Monday's progress report from Release Manager Anthony "aj" Towns,
which appears to answer your questions:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/debian-devel-announce-200312/msg00000.html

Meanwhile, Sarge continues to work fine (at least on IA32), regardless
of where the "stable" symlink points.  If you need installation media,
follow the Installers link on
http://linuxmafia.com/cgi-bin/index.pl/Debian , and take your pick.

--

-- 
Cheers,           "I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate
Rick Moen         those who do.  And, for the people who like country music,
rick <at> linuxmafia.com         denigrate means 'put down'."      -- Bob Newhart
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists
(Continue reading)

Karsten M. Self | 3 Dec 05:12 2003
Picon

Re: sarge

on Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 04:12:28PM -0800, Rick Moen (rick <at> linuxmafia.com) wrote:
> [Sorry about breaking threading.  I deleted the original.]

/me wonders what happend to the zgp.org x-mailmethis-handler....

Peace.

--

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself <at> ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
   Moderator, Free Software Law Discussion mailing list:
     http://lists.alt.org/mailman/listinfo/fsl-discuss/
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists
Rick Moen | 3 Dec 05:23 2003

Re: sarge

Quoting Karsten Self (kmself <at> ix.netcom.com):

> /me wonders what happend to the zgp.org x-mailmethis-handler....

I tried to use it, actually.  Couldn't find the thread.  I imagine that
parsing every MUA's output is a really nasty problem, and that Don's
code chokes on some of the nasty stuff.

--

-- 
Cheers,                        A: No.  
Rick Moen                      Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? 
rick <at> linuxmafia.com  
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Don Marti | 4 Dec 01:55 2003

Experiment in Magazine Meta-Moderation

One of the hard parts about doing print media instead of web is
that it's hard to find out which articles people are actually
interested in or confused by.  So I'm going to try holding
feedback/help sessions on the 2nd Wednesday of the month.

http://linuxjournal.meetup.com/

I hope to see all 400 members of this list there.

--

-- 
Don Marti
http://zgp.org/~dmarti                      Learn Linux and free software 
dmarti <at> zgp.org                        from the experts in California, USA 
                                      http://freedomtechnologycenter.org/
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Peter Whysall | 4 Dec 07:25 2003
Picon

Re: Experiment in Magazine Meta-Moderation

On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 00:55, Don Marti wrote:
> One of the hard parts about doing print media instead of web is
> that it's hard to find out which articles people are actually
> interested in or confused by.  So I'm going to try holding
> feedback/help sessions on the 2nd Wednesday of the month.
> 
> http://linuxjournal.meetup.com/
> 
> I hope to see all 400 members of this list there.

"Not enough Linux Journal Readers near Newcastle, England can make it,
so this month's Meetup is cancelled."

Boo, hiss.

Peter.
--

-- 
Peter Whysall <peter <at> whysall.net>

_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Seth David Schoen | 4 Dec 09:47 2003

Microsoft licensing FAT?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2001806897_microsoft04.html

  Two technologies in particular were highlighted for licensing
  yesterday: the File Allocation Table (FAT) file system and the
  ClearType readability software.

  Operating systems use FAT to track information about computer files,
  such as their location, and to reassemble the files for viewing. It
  has become widely used to exchange media between computer and digital
  devices, and could be of interest to digital camera or camcorder
  companies, for example. The license is priced at 25 cents per unit
  with a $250,000 cap on total royalties per manufacturer.

  Some companies might just write Microsoft a $250,000 check instead of
  keeping track of the per-unit royalties, Kaefer said. 

--

-- 
Seth David Schoen <schoen <at> loyalty.org> | Very frankly, I am opposed to people
     http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/   | being programmed by others.
     http://vitanuova.loyalty.org/     |     -- Fred Rogers (1928-2003),
                                       |        464 U.S. 417, 445 (1984)
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Gilad Ben-Yossef | 4 Dec 09:56 2003

Re: Microsoft licensing FAT?

On Thursday 04 December 2003 10:47, Seth David Schoen wrote:
> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2001806897_micr
>osoft04.html
>
>   Two technologies in particular were highlighted for licensing
>   yesterday: the File Allocation Table (FAT) file system and the
>   ClearType readability software.
>
>   Operating systems use FAT to track information about computer files,
>   such as their location, and to reassemble the files for viewing. It
>   has become widely used to exchange media between computer and digital
>   devices, and could be of interest to digital camera or camcorder
>   companies, for example. The license is priced at 25 cents per unit
>   with a $250,000 cap on total royalties per manufacturer.
>
>   Some companies might just write Microsoft a $250,000 check instead of
>   keeping track of the per-unit royalties, Kaefer said.

On what basis are they selling licenses?

Do they sell license for software that access FAT or do they have some sort 
of patent that covers FAT? because trade secret it ain't, that's for 
sure...

Gilad

--

-- 
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad <at> benyossef.com>
Codefidence. A name you can trust (tm)
http://www.codefidence.com
(Continue reading)

Jay Sulzberger | 4 Dec 10:27 2003
Picon

Re: Microsoft licensing FAT?


On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Seth David Schoen wrote:

> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2001806897_microsoft04.html
>
>   Two technologies in particular were highlighted for licensing
>   yesterday: the File Allocation Table (FAT) file system and the
>   ClearType readability software.
>
>   Operating systems use FAT to track information about computer files,
>   such as their location, and to reassemble the files for viewing. It
>   has become widely used to exchange media between computer and digital
>   devices, and could be of interest to digital camera or camcorder
>   companies, for example. The license is priced at 25 cents per unit
>   with a $250,000 cap on total royalties per manufacturer.
>
>   Some companies might just write Microsoft a $250,000 check instead of
>   keeping track of the per-unit royalties, Kaefer said.
>
> --
> Seth David Schoen <schoen <at> loyalty.org> | Very frankly, I am opposed to people

Of course, there is no reason to license anything from Microsoft.  In
particular, the kernel I run right now deals just fine with FAT
filesystems.

To take a "license for FAT" would suggest that there is some shadow of a
suggestion of an iota of legitimate right in what Microsoft is here
attempting: namely to claim a legal power to stop you and me and all the
world from running free kernels and free file system tools.  Microsoft has
(Continue reading)


Gmane