"Matthew Garrett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The file util/ansi2knr.c is also GPL. I'm pretty sure it's unused, but
an easy reference in debian/copyright would cover it.
This may be a problem if it is used, as:
Tha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Well, there is chrony, which is feature complete with ntp as far as I
>can tell.
Except that it is not. NTP is hard, and attempts to make it simpler
probably are not "feature-complete".
> Even without the licensing issues, I would recommend chrony
>anyway: chrony conver
In gmane.linux.debian.devel.release Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What are you going to replace it with? AFAIK, ntp is the only package
> we have in Debian which supports useful clock synchronization, which is
> essential for a number of other services (e.g., Kerberos).
Well, there
Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Please stop being rude when you're wrong.
Pot, kettle, black.
> The general license is attached to *one copyright notice*, that for the
> lead author.
> If the license was clearly issued by more than one copyright holder
> (which it's not), and the
Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> There are several files that are BSD with advertising clause, including
>>> libntp/memmove.c, libntp/mktime.c, libntp/random.c, libntp/strerror.c,
>>> libntp/strstr.c, ntpd/refclock_jupit
Marco D'Itri wrote:
No, maybe it's you who do not understand english, or probably just like
armchair lawyering.
Please stop being rude when you're wrong.
You apparenly don't understand the difference between a license and a
copyright notice. Actually, it's
quite possible the authors of NTP d
On Sep 15, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You apparenly don't understand the difference between a license and a
> copyright notice.
I do, and I stand by my opinion: the package license is intended to be
applied to everything, and pretending otherwise is useless pedantry.
--
ciao,
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There are several files that are BSD with advertising clause, including
> > libntp/memmove.c, libntp/mktime.c, libntp/random.c, libntp/strerror.c,
> > libntp/strstr.c, ntpd/refclock_jupiter.c, and ntpd/refclock_mx4200.c.
> > These
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I've just been through the ntp source tree looking at all the
copyright and license assertions. Executive summary is that there are
indeed some problems, but it's not bad, and I believe it can be fixed
with an upload that elides certain bits from the upstream sources
Marco D'Itri wrote:
I see nothing wrong libparse/*, just because the files have an
extra warranty disclaimer it does not mean that the package license does
not apply.
Then you don't understand copyright law.
The package copyright notice and license states that it applies to files
except where
On Sep 15, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I see nothing wrong libparse/*, just because the files have an
> >extra warranty disclaimer it does not mean that the package license does
> >not apply.
>
> Then you don't understand copyright law.
> The package copyright notice and licens
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:03:36 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote:
> What are you going to replace it with? AFAIK, ntp is the only package
> we have in Debian which supports useful clock synchronization, which
> is essential for a number of other services (e.g., Kerberos).
Isn't chrony a possible replacem
Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The file util/ansi2knr.c is also GPL. I'm pretty sure it's unused, but
> an easy reference in debian/copyright would cover it.
This may be a problem if it is used, as:
> There are several files that are BSD with advertising clause, including
> libntp/me
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Another alternative is the chrony package. I use that and am very happy
>with it.
It's an alternative as much as ae can be an alternative for emacs.
--
ciao,
Marco
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 00:03 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> The maintainers should have a chance to clear up this question first.
Ok, I've just been through the ntp source tree looking at all the
copyright and license assertions. Executive summary is that there are
indeed some problems, but it's
ackage
> >>we have in Debian which supports useful clock synchronization, which is
> >>essential for a number of other services (e.g., Kerberos).
> >
> >
> >I've never tested openntpd, but it is the obvious replacement in case of
> >legal problems with n
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 00:03 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> The maintainers should have a chance to clear up this question first.
I'll have a look at it today.
Bdale
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(replying from work, so sorry for breaking the thread)
> What are you going to replace it with? AFAIK, ntp is the only package
> we have in Debian which supports useful clock synchronization, which is
> essential for a number of other services (e.g., Kerberos).
Another alternative is the chr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I use openntpd and that works better then ntp IMHO.
This is bullshit. openntpd is at best an unneeded replacement for
ntpdate, and at worst a POS which will actively harm other NTP
servers and clients.
Anyway: I do not think that the arlib license is intended to be
non-f
only package
we have in Debian which supports useful clock synchronization, which is
essential for a number of other services (e.g., Kerberos).
I've never tested openntpd, but it is the obvious replacement in case of legal
problems with ntp and it has been released with sarge.
I use ope
hile.
>
> What are you going to replace it with? AFAIK, ntp is the only package
> we have in Debian which supports useful clock synchronization, which is
> essential for a number of other services (e.g., Kerberos).
I've never tested openntpd, but it is the obvious replacement in ca
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 01:07:30AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> I just discovered that the ntp source is a nest of licensing problems.
> The arlib subdir isn't distributable.
> Neither is the entire libparse subdir, or anything else by Frank Kardel.
> I'm not actually sure it will build witho
I just discovered that the ntp source is a nest of licensing problems.
The arlib subdir isn't distributable.
Neither is the entire libparse subdir, or anything else by Frank Kardel.
I'm not actually sure it will build without these bits.
So I guess NTP should be removed from Debian. It's not ve
23 matches
Mail list logo
