Linuxers October 2006

linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in

80 participants
155 discussions

linux debate
by BombayNews 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

wonder why techies on this forum debating on taking linux to the people devote much time on the free/open source issue. Outside the rarefied world of coders working on linux this debate is completely meaningless. The wo/man on the street needs an OS that is stable, gets the work done without much ado and preferably free. Could linuxers focus on this? Getting such a hassle-free system on the desktops of people intending to migrate out of the Windows environment would be the clearest test for taking Linux to the masses. Shiv Kumar

4 3

Re: cdrecord 2.0
by Roshan 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Devdas Bhagat Wrote: > In kernels 2.4 and below, you need to turn on SCSI > emulation (ide-scsi). Ah! Now, I know, why I shouldn't be using Redhat Linux 9.0 or atleast learn to compile a new kernel. ;) > In 2.6, just pass cdrecord the ATA device. > > cdrecord dev=/dev/hdc foo.iso I'll see if I can try this over Kubuntu, when I install it after some weeks. (or FC5) Vihan Wrote: > Consequently cdrw tools became the norm for CD > writing. and they use cdrecord internally and emulate IDE-SCSI for ATAPI drives. (Correct me if I am wrong) Faraz Shahbazker Wrote: > On Debian Sarge this is documented in detail at: > /usr/share/doc/cdrecord/README.ATAPI.setup Hey, thanks for this. I don't know why, but I always forget that there is this directory where most of the packages, that I have installed, have its documentation. I have got a similar file (README.ATAPI), that has helped me understand more details. Thanks! (to all the three of you!) -- http://www.linuxreality.com (Podcasts also for LINUX USERS) __________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new http://in.answers.yahoo.com/

3 2

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Abhishek Choudhary 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Well why not "Linux/GNU" instead of "GNU/Linux"? Is it some age factor? :) All right, if you use Hurd then probably only GNU or Hurd/GNU! To be clear, show me one machine that runs vanilla "GNU". Amusing right - you might think I am a novice who does not know why one needs a kernel! If _you_ do understand the need for a kernel then why emphasize that GNU is an "Operating System" instead of claiming it to be what it actually is - a wonderful "toolchain". If it is the concept of userland / toolchain / original credit then let it be "Linux/GNU". The Linux kernel, and probably even the BSD kernels, have had a major role to play in making the "GNU" userland available to non- techie users - lets say non computer scientists. So ultimately what FSF is trying to emphasize is probably that even though your machines' resources are being handled by Linux or some other kernel, it is actually the GNU tool chain that the user is using right from the level of the shell (GNU bash). Well then GNU is indeed dependent on Linux, just as the latter is dependent on it. Lets call a chair a chair and a table a table. Now, if you are even slightly convinced read on, or else send in a deluge of bandwidth blocking replies which ultimately serve no purpose towards user empowerment, without reading any further. Lets get things clear and straight - I am one of the greatest fans of RMS. Being a compilers enthusiast myself RMS is like a God considering his contributions begining with Bison and the GPL philosophy. Yes the GPL philosophy and just the license. And that philosophy is "freedom". Then why does GPL tend to restrict it? Why are non-English versions of GPL not officially available? (correct me if this is novice Q) Why does GPL not address the issues regarding localisation? Why does GPL take away ones rights to actually write prorietary code derived from it? (Forgive me if I have touched on a painful nerve) There are numerous commercial software vendors who use GNU software in their commercial stuff. For instance HP- UX. All of us who have used it know the extent to which GNU is a part of HP-UX. It suits HP's model. They are a hardware vendor, and make money from hardware more than they do from software. However, think of a small time developer. An individual who has his aspiations, dreams, wishes, and a word in his heart which reads like "freedom". If he were to develop a very niche piece of software, he would be forced to make public his source code because he cannot use commercial tool-chain, and is therefore left with GNU, which implies his code falls under the GPL license. Now whose freedom are we talking about??? The big companies who will not waste any time in consuming his code into their commercial software. (Ah well - I have heard that "joke" about every software gets its economic worth! It happens in a developed nation but not where people cut short a day's meal to one, or maybe fast, to pay their computer institute fees.) Please! Lets talk freedom - freedom as in free, lest freedom becomes the next f-word! Look at the 95% of our population to whom all of this discussion just does not make any sense. No not because it is not relevant, but because it is in English! Just as a piece of _information_, the Indian copyright laws give the copyright to the translator if the original author did not publish the Indian language version of her work. The time probably is not far when this 95% super-majority will get tired of our useless musings and revolt, and convert the existing GNU source code to Indic programming languages, and yes get the copyright. Get it!!!!!! Still not. Come on get down to producing some real work now. Probably instead of keying in useless comments and counter comments, concentrate on keying in at least a few lines of code. You will certainly be helping FSF a lot more that way. And indeed if you also do something for the 95% (which many of you involved in Indic localisation are actually doing), then trust me you will also have done a lot of good towards "Freedom". Regards, Abhishek

1 0

Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Vihan Pandey 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

> Mrugesh, when YOU create something YOU are the copyrite holder and that is > unquestionable. You will be credited no matter what. The question is if one > ``truly" believes in a community spirit you name it something consistent > with it. That's probably why GNU C is not called "the Stallman compiler" but > it could have if the person concerned put his ego before the > community(``unlike" some people). Moreover on top of that claiming that you > are a champion of digital rights is ludicrous. > > Stallman could have even trademarked Emacs, GNU C, GDB, > Bison(co-trademarking ?) with each news/magazine/web pages advertising "XYZ > is Trademark of Richard Stallman". > > What I hate about you FSF people is that you try and steal credit. You > > just said the same thing again... Use GNU in the name? WHY? Make up a > > name that highlights freedom, _very very clearly_. > > > Any suggestions? By the way in Revolution OS Linus himself said he wanted > to call it Freeix, but he ``wasn't that egoistic then". > > Oh and mind you, you say GNU/Linux not GNU & Linux. The only place where > > I've seen that second term used is on those stickers: > > "GNU + Linux, the dynamic duo". > > I think that's fair. Clearly states that Linux is a separate project. > > GNU/Linux does not do that. > > > By the way those stickers are courtesy FSF. Also, during Stallman's recent > talk there were a few badges given out to the lucky few who came in first > and grabbed them :-) with The GNU, Tux and Beastie on them crediting FSF, > Linux and FreeBSD. FSF has never for a second ``forgotten" Linux, RMS has > repeatedly stated in countless speeches that a kernel was the need of the > day and Linus fulfilled it at the right time. But how often is the reverse > done? > > Highlight "request". I agree with Linus. If the kernel developers think > > that GPL 3 is no good for the kernel, so be it. Let it be under GPL 2. > > Why create an issue? Highlight "request". > > > Do ALL the developers agree? If they do then as they are the copyrite > holders they have every right to put it ``all of it" under GPL v2. If there > are developers who think different and hold a copyrite on certain modules > they could just as well go in for GPL v3. > > Again, no intention of a flame war. But if you are going to use sentences > like ``hate about you FSF people" i doubt if i could just sit by. > > Regards, > > - vihan >

2 1

Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Roshan 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

"Dinesh Shah" Wrote: > Hi Roshan, Hello :) > Ubuntu should be considered as a business in > "Investment Phase", where > business invests to create it's market share. I had > a long discussion > with Mark Shuttleworth on this when he was in India. But its webpages and the CD-covers state that Ubuntu will be always free of charge (no money, free). So did he mean, that the software is going to cost money once, it acquires a greater market share? > This is termed as "Donation Economy". However, I am > not in favour of > such an economy. Such a economy is not sustainable > over long period of > time. I too think how can it be sustainable. But, hasn't the FSF proved it to be? -- http://www.linuxreality.com (Podcasts also for LINUX USERS) __________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new http://in.answers.yahoo.com/

1 0

Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Roshan 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Mrugesh Karnik Wrote: > What I hate about you FSF people is that you try and > steal credit. You > just said the same thing again... Use GNU in the > name? WHY? Make up a > name that highlights freedom, _very very clearly_. > Oh and mind you, you say GNU/Linux not GNU & Linux. > The only place where > I've seen that second term used is on those > stickers: > > "GNU + Linux, the dynamic duo". > > I think that's fair. Clearly states that Linux is a > separate project. > GNU/Linux does not do that. Warning: I am not doing *ga ga gee gee over*(spouting), in favour of either the GNU or FSF or Linus Torvalds. After reading documents at http://www.gnu.org, its understood, Mr. Richard Stallman acknowledges Linus's effort and therefore, the name GNU/Linux. The use of GNU/Linux implicitly indicates, GNU plus Linux or GNU+Linux. I somehow feel, it still indicates, Linux is a great project. It clearly distinguished the credit of Linus and also maintained the credibility of GNU itself. If Linus Torvalds deserves a better credit, name it Linux/GNU. Linus in his first email, had mentioned, that it is not going to be as big as the GNU (or as professional as it it). He believes, that the kernel code was meant to be distributed free of cost (and nothing related to freedom). The GNU team, was lucky enough to be successful in obtaining the Linux Kernel, and serving it as their core kernel for the entire GNU operating system. -- http://www.linuxreality.com (Podcasts also for LINUX USERS) __________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new http://in.answers.yahoo.com/

1 0

Re: Linus on Linux and the GPLv3
by Roshan 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Rony wrote: > In case of the former, one can charge any X amount > from the client for > making a customized package. > > But in the latter, suppose I make a CAD software > thats very good and > works just like the popular closed CAD software. I > post it on the net > under GPL and keep a price of some 100s of dollars. > Now some smart alec > who is out to ruin my business compiles my code and > even acknowledges my > good work and puts the package on the net for a free > download. He is > doing a perfectly legal thing as the GPL allows > this. So how do I run my > company when my work is available to others for free > as in beer. When we consider such a scenario, the ratio of developers / programmers and customers (or end users) would result to less than 1 (< 1). By this, I mean, there are far more end-users than developers and programmers. Again, if smart alec, put its on the internet, there would some investment, that would make him re-consider, putting it for free. Secondly, he would have to invest in advertising that he's put your software as free download. Considering the cost of $100, it would also indicate that you have some amount invested in good advertising and that your software is under GPL. Even then considering the worst case scenario, Vinayak Suggested: > 4) Dual licensing source code for commercial use (one of his points). I found the following page descirbing dual licensing http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/duallicence2.xml What Ubuntu does is, despite that it sends CD's for free (no cost) to anybody who demands its, provides supports for Ubuntu OS at desktop and server levels. But this in turn indicates, that much of the Free software over the internet are indeed, also, free as in bear, especially Linux distros. Where is the source of money for maintaining mirrors / servers for ISO's of these distros? __________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new http://in.answers.yahoo.com/

3 2

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Livecd distro or alternative required
by Krishna Dagli/Krushna Dagli 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

> > Hi > I am working from a hotel room and have good amount of spare time on > weekends. > Can anyone suggest a suitable linux live cd whereby i can work on linux > and > save documents on to my laptop and most important > learn programming. I am on a ibm t41 laptop. I have some books from where > I > can learn programming > > any other alternative similar to livecd also will be useful > > Ninad Use vmware or something so you will not have problem of something missing from the Live Cd and why not dual boot laptop? HTH -Krishna

3 3

Is Open Source safer than Closed Source?
by Sujeet Bhatt 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

Business Week Online Insecurity in Open Source What open-source developers can learn about security and quality from—gasp—makers of proprietary software OCTOBER 6, 2006 Viewpoint By Ben Chelf Debates over what methods result in the best software often pit those who favor an open-source approach against proponents of proprietary, or closed-source, development. Conventional wisdom holds that open-source software should have fewer security flaws than proprietary software. With more eyes able to look at the underlying source code, bugs should be found and squashed much faster. But when software security and quality really matter—like crossing the Atlantic on a jet airliner—trust me, you want to fly proprietary. That conclusion is based on my company's involvement in testing of software security and quality. Working with the Homeland Security Dept. and Stanford University, my firm, Coverity, has closely analyzed 50 of the most popular open-source software projects, scanning more than 20 million lines of code daily. We publish those results here on the Web. BUG TO BUG COMPARISON. For the first time, we've compared those results with proprietary software from more than 100 different companies, including some of the best-known names in aerospace, financial services, software, and telecommunications—more than 60 million lines of code all together. In our research using automatic bug-hunting technology, no open-source project we analyzed had fewer software defects (per thousand lines of code) than the top-of-the-line closed-source application. That proprietary code, written for an aerospace company, is better than the best in open source—more than five times better, in fact. That company's software won't let you down when you're flying from New York to London. Of the more than 150 open-source and proprietary software applications that we have analyzed in this study, closed-source software code grabbed 11 of the top 15 spots for the highest quality and security. Full at: http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/oct2006/tc20061006_394140.ht…

6 6

cdrecord 2.0
by Roshan 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

I don't know much about cdrecord, and its man pages specify only SCSI drives for writing to CD. Is it so, that cdrecord is one of the command line options only for *SCSI* optical drives? (CD Writers) I currently use K3b to write CD's, but wanted to try out cdrecord, and it seems as if there's no ATA support with it, is it? -- I am a novice, and still learing __________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new http://in.answers.yahoo.com/

4 3

← Newer
1
...
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Linuxers October 2006