rd Stallman about this, when I heard he was working
>on GPLv3. He said he'd think about it. Since there is no GPLv3 yet,
>I presume he's still thinking :-)
>
>Richard Braakman
>
>
>--
>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>with a subject of "uns
means 'I should
>read policy'.
>
>
>--
>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
I can be immature if I want to, because I'm mature enough to make my own
decisions.
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED]
account.
>I'd like to suggest deleting "to root".
>
>
--
I can be immature if I want to, because I'm mature enough to make my own
decisions.
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and apt 0.4.
>
>Cheers,
>aj
>
>
--
EMACS == Eight Megabytes And Constantly Swapping
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
tributors.html
>
>For inclusion in non-free, which is more significant: access to source
>code or 100% FHS compliance?
>
>Thanks,
>
>
--
Customer: "I'm running Windows '98" Tech: "Yes." Customer:
"My computer isn't working now." Tech: "Yes, you said that."
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
plication of High Explosives.
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Moshe Zadka wrote:
>On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:46:19 +, "Oliver Elphick" wrote:
>> Moshe Zadka wrote:
>> >OTOH, it bothers me that there are subdirectories under /usr/bin.
>> >E.g.:
>> >Try typing "mh" at the prompt for weird behaviour.
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mh
>> b
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, David Schleef wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 08:16:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
> > Now John, I consider myself fairly competent; however, with three dhcp
> > clients to choose from (an actual situation from many months ago) many
> > folks won't know which one is *best*, as
Again, how about the target audience for a task-*: -user? If it's for Joe
Newbie, wouldn't it be good to get his input before carving something in
stone?
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Chris Waters wrote:
>
> A requirement for discussion on -policy before adding a task package
> might well go a long wa
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, John Galt wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> >
> > > Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> > > > Another thing that I think is important is that a task should actually
> > > > ha
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> > Another thing that I think is important is that a task should actually
> > have the effect of installing a multitude of packages. If it doesn't,
> > you gain nothing over selecting packages by hand.
>
> No, you gain the ability to sa
I'm going to chime in with my non-DD-ness. ATM the people who decide a
task package are not the ones who will ever use them. Tasks were by
definition not for developers, but for FNGs--DD's should know what they
want. Has anyone gone to -user and ASKED? I would submit that the first
step in ref
On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 09:55:20PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> > Do I get to quote Whitman here? "Do I contradict myself, very well then,
> > I contradict myself [I am many, I contain multitudes]" :)
>
> The irony of thi
wrote:
> > > Actually, it does make a difference -- we're not in violation of the
> > > GPL for any instance where we're distributing .debs to users of debian
> > > systems.
>
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 03:53:28PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> > Yeah, bu
On 5 Dec 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Okay, "you". No sweat off my nose if you wish to exclude me.
>
> Well, I ask because again your motives for posting are unclear.
>
> For all I know, you're
Okay, "you". No sweat off my nose if you wish to exclude me.
On 5 Dec 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Can we really expect others to follow the DFSG when we do so
> > only when convenient?
>
> "w
ld* point out that a *lot* of the software we
> > provide *cannot* be redistributed *unless* you also provide the
> > source. That is, after all, the terms of the GPL, and it clearly
> > doesn't match what you seem to think.
>
> Good idea. [There's a good chance we al
gt;
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Who is John Galt?
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.
-- Ferenc Mantfeld
On 2 Dec 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > pkg_add -r gcc on a freebsd box will pull down a binary of gcc without a
> > copy of the GPL.
>
> Perhaps I'm confused, but I thought the normal procedure was the
&g
On 2 Dec 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Is it? What does Debian have to do with EvilCorp that Red Hat or
> > Slackware doesn't? Why is Debian getting singled out? Why haven't I seen
> > the same thing on
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 02:54:24AM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> > On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 10:58:36PM -0800, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> > > > Since when does intenti
On 2 Dec 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > www.ll.georgetown.edu/Fed-Ct/Circuit/fed/opinions/97-1425.html
> >
> > Reasonable man and estoppel are linked, and a choice quote:
> >
> > A delay of more than
On 2 Dec 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > See Wollensak v. Reiher, 115 U.S. 96, 99 (1885). See also USC Title 17,
> > section 507
> >
> > * (b) Civil Actions. - No civil action shall be maintained under the
On 2 Dec 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > First of all, knowledge is not that of the actors, but of the "reasonable
> > man". The .deb archive standard contents were decided on when Debian was
> > still a
On 2 Dec 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Lawyers are involved? This makes it imperitive that no change ever get
> > off the ground ATM. Compromising around a lawyer is like bleeding around
> > a shark: you don'
On 2 Dec 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Widespread ignorance of the law is. Name one binary packaging system that
> > always includes the GPL when necessary. Five years without a correct
> > implementation is evide
stomer: "I'm running Windows '98" Tech: "Yes." Customer:
"My computer isn't working now." Tech: "Yes, you said that."
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
implementation is evidence of widespread ignorance or a changing playing
field, take your choice.
>
--
Customer: "I'm running Windows '98" Tech: "Yes." Customer:
"My computer isn't working now." Tech: "Yes, you said that."
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
ware patent issue instead of a
copyright issue, 2/3 of the lifespan of the patent would've passed without
action by the holder. Most courts would laugh at the idea of allowing
injunctive relief in this situation.
--
void hamlet()
{#define question=((bb)||(!bb))}
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED] that's who!
On Fri, 1 Dec 2000, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 10:26:22PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> > >
> > > > In the Real-World application, though, installing 300+ copies of the GPL
> > > > is absurd, and, quite frankly, a waste of space. Which se
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Customer: "I'm running Windows '98" Tech: "Yes." Customer:
"My computer isn't working now." Tech: "Yes, you said that."
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
bstantial size for
a non-technically derived fix, is it?
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Customer: "I'm running Windows '98" Tech: "Y
of us with low drive space, violating DFSG 5, and discriminate
against making a small footprint distribution, violating DFSG 6. The
cat's out of the bag on DFSG 8 ATM, and there's no way it's going back in.
--
FINE, I take it back: UNfuck you!
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
> install it unless it isn't installed already.
>
> The famous dpkg-needs-metadata-per-file thing..
>
> Wichert.
>
>
--
FINE, I take it back: UNfuck you!
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
c.gov,
typical bureaucratic garbage, I'm guessing (but a PITA to hand paste--#$%^
synaptics touchpads...).
On Sat, 20 May 2000, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 07:46:11PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> > Has anyone submitted the non-US tree to Treasury so that it can be
>
Has anyone submitted the non-US tree to Treasury so that it can be
reviewed and exported legally? Unless somebody's done that, the current
export control laws still prevent export of it...They've been LOOSENED,
not eliminated.
On Sat, 20 May 2000, Raul Miller wrote:
> > > Ok, nothing illegal ab
the Debian userspace to other kernels. A
license that restricts architectural ports is unequivocally foolish, one
that restricts kernel ports is often perceived as less foolish, though
IMHO it's just as foolish.
On 17 Dec 1999, Henning Makholm wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
37 matches
Mail list logo
