From: Aaron Lehmann <aar...@vitelus.com> Subject: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/19 Message-ID: <fa.hcvgf1v.mheg8l@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424062914 Original-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 23:24:24 +0000 ( ) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9812192256470.14192-100000@vitelus.com> To: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu, r...@gnu.org, torva...@transmeta.com Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu From http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/news/0,4538,2177559,00.html: "With a general public license, there are some exposures with liability and how open are the patents if you modify the code. The best way to solve this is by cleaning up the license." **shudder** It is unclear to me whether they are suggesting that GNU change the GPL in their favor, or want Linux to swich to another license. I hope they understand that GPL'd code cannot be switched to a different license. I am afraid that large, proprietary companies with intrest in the Linux market will lead to the death of GNU/Linux. I already see here about companies criticizing the GPL. Another example would be WordPerfect. Thursday when a new version came out for $0 cost I decided to sin and try it. It sucked. It was totally proprietary and used proprietary libraries. The source code was not even available so there was no way I could compile it on my architecture of choice (PowerPC), and binaries were only available for i386. Corel released a small press release saying how "We have proven that the Linux community wants access to commercial, mainstream applications. . . and we intend to deliver them." Well, not everyone does want proprietary applications! I'm sticking with emacs until AbiWord is ready for prime time. I am not looking forward to the day when I will be forced to switch to another operating system such as GNU/HURD becuase it becomes nearrly impossible to run a clean GNU/Linux system becuase GNU/Linux has gotten too popular for it to be free. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> It is unclear to me whether they are suggesting that GNU
change the
> GPL in their favor, or want Linux to swich to another license. I hope they
> understand that GPL'd code cannot be switched to a different license.
Im not sure if its liability concerns or "Linux is great but we want to
change the license so we can extort money from everyone for using it". IBM
don't have a very good reputation with the IETF, with small vendors or
with patent reform people for their general behaviour in the patent area.
Sooner or later the entire US "sue everyone, patent everything" world is
going to start collapsing around their ears. Reform is urgently needed so
that if they have software patents they only accept those that are truely
clever and unique, and that they have a cheap simple appeals procedure to
stop abuse.
Next time you pay a dollar in the US for a product, remember that more
is going on insurance against lawsuits/patent mess than on taxes.
> deliver them." Well, not everyone does want proprietary applications! I'm
> sticking with emacs until AbiWord is ready for prime time. I am not
> looking forward to the day when I will be forced to switch to another
> operating system such as GNU/HURD becuase it becomes nearrly impossible to
> run a clean GNU/Linux system becuase GNU/Linux has gotten too popular for
> it to be free.
A lot of people passionately do not intend to let that occur. The Debian
free software guidelines for example are intended to ensure Debian stays
free software. Red Hat 5.2 puts all the commercial stuff on a seperate
CD so you know clearly what is what, and you can stick that CD in your
microwave and watch the pretty lights if you wish. You don't need it.
Both KDE and Gnome and others are working on free wordprocessing products,
they are all keen for helpers and all want it to work on your PPC
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: "David S. Miller" <da...@dm.cobaltmicro.com> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/19 Message-ID: <fa.f36lntv.1850bri@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424065150 Original-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 15:37:59 -0800 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <199812192337.PAA18672@dm.cobaltmicro.com> References: <fa.hcvgf1v.mheg8l@ifi.uio.no> To: aar...@vitelus.com Original-References: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9812192256470.14192-100...@vitelus.com> X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 23:24:24 +0000 ( ) From: Aaron Lehmann <aar...@vitelus.com> I am afraid that large, proprietary companies with intrest in the Linux market will lead to the death of GNU/Linux. IBM would have a hard time changing licensing, for the Linux kernel at least. They'd need to get permission from every single person who has ever contributed a significant (for copyright purposes) piece of code to the kernel before the license could be changed. No single entity can change the licensing of the kernel on his own, not Linus, not me, not Alan, not any company, no one. IBM is just a big machine which has had it's primary gears turning by the "patent game". They'll have to come to terms with the fact that in at least some areas of software, it just isn't going to be as feasible to keep doing so as it used to be. I was actually expecting events like this to happen when organizations who traditionally had massive amounts of software intellectual property want to start contributing to free software. Later, David S. Miller da...@dm.cobaltmicro.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Chip Salzenberg <c...@perlsupport.com>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/19
Message-ID: <fa.f0j4p2v.2ng9ga@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 424067792
Original-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 18:51:58 -0500
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-ID: <19981219185158.A4392@perlsupport.com>
References: <fa.hcvgf1v.mheg8l@ifi.uio.no>
To: Aaron Lehmann <aar...@vitelus.com>
Original-References: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9812192256470.14192-100...@vitelus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
According to Aaron Lehmann:
> I am afraid that large, proprietary companies with intrest in the
> Linux market will lead to the death of GNU/Linux.
The character of the community will change. But the code will always
be there, and so recovery will always be possible.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. - <c...@perlsupport.com>
"When do you work?" "Whenever I'm not busy."
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
George Bonser (grep@shorelink.com)On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> According to Aaron Lehmann:
> > I am afraid that large, proprietary companies with intrest in the
> > Linux market will lead to the death of GNU/Linux.
>
> The character of the community will change. But the code will always
> be there, and so recovery will always be possible.
There is no such thing as GNU/Linux at the kernel level, that is more at
the distribution level. If GNU wants to use Linux as their kernel and
build a distribution and call it GNU/Linux, I think that would be great.
Otherwise, they should keep their noses out of other people's products. I
do not see anywhere in the GPL where it says you are required to put GNU/
in front of any product that comes with or was made with GNU tools. If
someone wants to do that (such as Debian has), I say fine, but FSF has no
right to demand that someone do that.
It would be interesting to see a Linux distribution ship with all non-GNU
tools. I think there might be enough BSD stuff to actually do that. Would
RMS want to call that BSD/GNU/Linux?
George Bonser
The Linux "We're never going out of business" sale at an FTP site near you!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Aaron Lehmann <aar...@vitelus.com> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.jtgoqev.804i9j@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424169750 Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 00:37:46 +0000 ( ) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9812200033160.613-100000@vitelus.com> References: <fa.motnusv.81atju@ifi.uio.no> To: g...@oriole.sbay.org Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu I have to agree that it that GNU has little right to demand a GNU/ prefix on everything that ships which contains their code, especially with their very free license. However, GNU/Linux is really the correct terminology assuming your distribution is half made up of GNU tools. If someone were to create a BSD based Linux distribution, than the correct terminology would probably be BSD/Linux. On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, George Bonser wrote: > On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Chip Salzenberg wrote: > > > According to Aaron Lehmann: > > > I am afraid that large, proprietary companies with intrest in the > > > Linux market will lead to the death of GNU/Linux. > > > > The character of the community will change. But the code will always > > be there, and so recovery will always be possible. > > There is no such thing as GNU/Linux at the kernel level, that is more at > the distribution level. If GNU wants to use Linux as their kernel and > build a distribution and call it GNU/Linux, I think that would be great. > Otherwise, they should keep their noses out of other people's products. I > do not see anywhere in the GPL where it says you are required to put GNU/ > in front of any product that comes with or was made with GNU tools. If > someone wants to do that (such as Debian has), I say fine, but FSF has no > right to demand that someone do that. > > It would be interesting to see a Linux distribution ship with all non-GNU > tools. I think there might be enough BSD stuff to actually do that. Would > RMS want to call that BSD/GNU/Linux? > > > > > George Bonser > > The Linux "We're never going out of business" sale at an FTP site near you! > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Jon Hamilton <hamil...@pobox.com> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.k8i8usv.p00dqa@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424169755 Original-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 19:13:26 -0600 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <19981220002229Z154653-31090+10740@vger.rutgers.edu> References: <fa.jtgoqev.804i9j@ifi.uio.no> To: Aaron Lehmann <aar...@vitelus.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu In message <Pine.LNX.4.05.9812200033160.613-100...@vitelus.com>, Aaron Lehmann wrote: } I have to agree that it that GNU has little right to demand a GNU/ prefix } on everything that ships which contains their code, especially with their } very free license. } } However, GNU/Linux is really the correct terminology assuming your } distribution is half made up of GNU tools. I don't call my PC an "ASUS/AMD/AMI/Samsung/Intel" machine, do you? -- Jon Hamilton hamil...@pobox.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> } However, GNU/Linux is really the correct terminology
assuming your
> } distribution is half made up of GNU tools.
>
> I don't call my PC an "ASUS/AMD/AMI/Samsung/Intel" machine, do you?
Stallman has said many times all he was trying to do was remind people Linux
is part of one big community of free software not just its own little
community.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Chip Salzenberg <c...@perlsupport.com>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/20
Message-ID: <fa.f0j2oav.2ne88f@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 424170906
Original-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 19:27:57 -0500
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-ID: <19981219192756.B4392@perlsupport.com>
References: <fa.motnusv.81atju@ifi.uio.no>
To: g...@oriole.sbay.org
Original-References: <19981219185158.A4...@perlsupport.com>
<Pine.LNX.3.96.981219160348.1981U-100...@calvin.captech.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
According to George Bonser:
> On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > According to Aaron Lehmann:
> > > I am afraid that large, proprietary companies with intrest in the
> > > Linux market will lead to the death of GNU/Linux.
> >
> > The character of the community will change. But the code will always
> > be there, and so recovery will always be possible.
>
> There is no such thing as GNU/Linux at the kernel level, that is more at
> the distribution level.
Naming aside, my point is that open source software is always, well,
open -- open to be picked up and carried by new interested parties.
Even more, the GPL subset of the open source pool can't spawn private
forks; this is even stronger insurance.
So I don't worry about corporate interference. Not yet, anyway.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. - <c...@perlsupport.com>
"When do you work?" "Whenever I'm not busy."
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
George Bonser (grep@shorelink.com)On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> Naming aside, my point is that open source software is always, well,
> open -- open to be picked up and carried by new interested parties.
> Even more, the GPL subset of the open source pool can't spawn private
> forks; this is even stronger insurance.
>
> So I don't worry about corporate interference. Not yet, anyway.
Yes, I think that according to the GPL, any change that IBM makes in
existing code would have to be also GPL. Now if they write their own
separate piece, say a module, I think they can use any license they want.
OSS does not distribute the source for their commercial sound stuff, do
they?
QUESTION: Say IBM wrote their own mmap.c replacement with no GPL code in
it. Can they distribute a binary kernel image made with that mmap.c
without distributing the source to that small program? I mean, can that
particular mmap.c have a non-gpl license? In other words, they distribute
only the source for the GPL parts of the code?
George Bonser
The Linux "We're never going out of business" sale at an FTP site near you!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> Yes, I think that according to the GPL, any change that
IBM makes in
> existing code would have to be also GPL. Now if they write their own
> separate piece, say a module, I think they can use any license they want.
> OSS does not distribute the source for their commercial sound stuff, do
> they?
Linus has given permission for third party modules that are not source
to be distributed providing they use the existing modules apis. I've not
seen a single binary only module thats actually remotely popular with its
user base other than the commercial OSS sound modules.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acaha...@cs.uml.edu> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.g6b7glv.d0ato8@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424170911 Original-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 21:11:21 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <199812200211.VAA04581@saturn.cs.uml.edu> To: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu George Bonser writes: > On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Chip Salzenberg wrote: > >> Naming aside, my point is that open source software is always, well, >> open -- open to be picked up and carried by new interested parties. >> Even more, the GPL subset of the open source pool can't spawn private >> forks; this is even stronger insurance. >> >> So I don't worry about corporate interference. Not yet, anyway. > > Yes, I think that according to the GPL, any change that IBM makes in > existing code would have to be also GPL. Now if they write their own > separate piece, say a module, I think they can use any license they want. > OSS does not distribute the source for their commercial sound stuff, do > they? > > QUESTION: Say IBM wrote their own mmap.c replacement with no GPL code in > it. Can they distribute a binary kernel image made with that mmap.c > without distributing the source to that small program? I mean, can that > particular mmap.c have a non-gpl license? In other words, they distribute > only the source for the GPL parts of the code? That is not the problem at all. The problem: if IBM supplies 24x7 support for Linux, they will want to tweak the code to help their customers. No problem, and it falls under the GPL of course. What if IBM uses an IBM patent? It would be very bad (from their point of view) if that somehow gave everyone rights to the patent. IBM needs a way to tightly bind a patent license to the source code. Without that, they are afraid to contribute. IBM might even want to specifically tie patents to Linux. (not also gcc, HURD, emacs...) It is unfortunate that the FSF doesn't hold any patents. I don't think that they like patents at all, but they need some so that they can trade. (if anything, patent issues could give GPL code an advantage over BSD code) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> The problem: if IBM supplies 24x7 support for Linux, they
will want
> to tweak the code to help their customers. No problem, and it falls
> under the GPL of course. What if IBM uses an IBM patent? It would be
> very bad (from their point of view) if that somehow gave everyone
> rights to the patent.
That I can understand. I'm still of the opinion all the abusers of software
patents in the US ought to be nailed to trees but I can see the sanity of
making the GPL require the patent is granted to GPL'd software only. That
protects its value in the legacy (grin) proprietary software market. That
doesn't seem too unreasonble an idea.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: C S Hendrix <shend...@escape.widomaker.com> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.id02mkv.qimejr@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424170918 Original-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 21:57:58 -0500 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <199812200257.VAA22100@escape.widomaker.com> References: <fa.g6b7glv.d0ato8@ifi.uio.no> To: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Reply-To: shend...@escape.widomaker.com Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu In message <199812200211.VAA04...@saturn.cs.uml.edu>, "Albert D. Cahalan" write s: > The problem: if IBM supplies 24x7 support for Linux, they will want > to tweak the code to help their customers. No problem, and it falls > under the GPL of course. What if IBM uses an IBM patent? It would be > very bad (from their point of view) if that somehow gave everyone > rights to the patent. Doesn't IBM own patents on things like shared copy-on-write and other techniques used in the Linux kernel? -- Shannon - shend...@widomaker.com - www.widomaker.com - Linux 2.0.x ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "The inevitable result of improved and enlarged communications between different levels in a hierarchy is a vastly increased area of misunderstanding." - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> > under the GPL of course. What if IBM uses an IBM
patent? It would be
> > very bad (from their point of view) if that somehow gave everyone
> > rights to the patent.
>
> Doesn't IBM own patents on things like shared copy-on-write and other
> techniques used in the Linux kernel?
Techniques like that are so old they should have lapsed a long time ago.
IBM is a large company however and like several other large US companies
they patent anything that they think they can get away with.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Dave Cinege <dcin...@psychosis.com> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.ev0m8bv.22el04@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424170925 Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 00:45:23 -0500 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Original-Message-ID: <367C8EF3.AC241233@psychosis.com> References: <fa.g6b7glv.d0ato8@ifi.uio.no> To: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acaha...@cs.uml.edu> Original-References: <199812200211.VAA04...@saturn.cs.uml.edu> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: www.psychosis.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: dcin...@psychosis.com Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu "Albert D. Cahalan" wrote: > IBM needs a way to tightly bind a patent license to the source code. > Without that, they are afraid to contribute. IBM might even want to > specifically tie patents to Linux. (not also gcc, HURD, emacs...) What IBM needs to do is play ball according to the rules that have been layed down, or look for another market to tap. > It is unfortunate that the FSF doesn't hold any patents. I don't think > that they like patents at all, but they need some so that they can trade. > (if anything, patent issues could give GPL code an advantage over BSD code) Stallman once told me, "patents are a governement mandated monopoly". I've thought alot about that. He's right. Who is to say what is and is not patentable? (Do you cede that government has a stake in all ideas???) If you want to keep TOTAL rights to something, DON'T make it public at all. If IBM is forced to give up a patent's protection in order to contribute to Linux, I say good. If they choose to pass on Linux instead, I also say good. We're enough of an influence to be noticed, and we stuck to our pricipals that helped get us here. No company created Linux. No company can stop it, unless people get too greedy/stupid. -- http://www.linkscape.net/ Linkscape Internet Services 732-541-4214 http://www.linuxrouter.org/ Linux Router Project At 19981216.11:59 Zulu, Mach 1 was broken with a 1.0080162GHz Dual CPU machine. I'm the Degenerate Overclocker that did it. http://www.psychosis.com/doa/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
George Bonser (grep@shorelink.com)On Sun, 20 Dec 1998, Dave Cinege wrote:
> Who is to say what is and is not patentable? (Do you cede that government
has a
> stake in all ideas???) If you want to keep TOTAL rights to something, DON'T
> make it public at all.
Exactly why Coca-Cola has never patented their recipie. To do so would be
to put it into the public domain after X years expired. A patent at least
makes sure that the details are shared with the common community after a
period of exclusive use by the inventor. Without patents, there would be a
great many more trade secrets.
I guess I am saying that patents can also be a longer term benefit. Maybe
someone will take it upon themselves to research expired patents and get
these techniques into Open Source programs just to bootstrap these
technologies into the mainstream public domain.
George Bonser
The Linux "We're never going out of business" sale at an FTP site near you!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> to put it into the public domain after X years expired. A
patent at least
> makes sure that the details are shared with the common community after a
> period of exclusive use by the inventor. Without patents, there would be a
> great many more trade secrets.
_used to_. There is now an entire profession of writing patents in such
a way that even when they expire you cannot possibly reconstruct what they
were on about in full.
In the current world trade secrets are less evil than patents. If someone
discovers something clever and patents it then they get a little piece
of paper granting them monopoly power. These are then traded to create a
little cabal of vendors who 'compete' in a very minimal fashion and lock
the entire market down while ripping customers off
In a world driven by trade secrets we occasionally lose a good idea but
something not truely obvious will be rediscovered refined and improved
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: "D.A. Harris" <rod...@ecst.csuchico.edu> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.i8ltmpv.1ule9o9@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424255350 Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 09:43:37 -0800 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <19981220094337.A9270@ecst.csuchico.edu> References: <fa.jife3fv.1ri6ih8@ifi.uio.no> To: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.981219162857.1981V-100...@calvin.captech.com> <m0zrYPN-0007...@the-village.bc.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu On Sun, Dec 20, 1998 at 02:15:47AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > Linus has given permission for third party modules that are not source > to be distributed providing they use the existing modules apis. I've not > seen a single binary only module thats actually remotely popular with its > user base other than the commercial OSS sound modules. > > Alan > It wouldn't surprise me to see more of this occur. Especially when you have propietary hardware manufacturers that write the drivers and interfaces for their hardware when want to interface with Linux, and not release openly the source to what they perceive as a major source of their income. Granted it will more likely happen with more specialized, high end hardware, unless it is the case where it is just too easy to install and use, to not buy, as with OSS. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dale Harris <rod...@csuchico.edu> http://www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~rodmur/ GPG-Fingerprint: 91E0 A853 2CCD 74D3 B22C 0AA9 1569 4163 298B 9017 |+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+| - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> It wouldn't surprise me to see more of this occur.
Especially when you
> have propietary hardware manufacturers that write the drivers and interfaces
> for their hardware when want to interface with Linux, and not release
Quite the reverse appears to be happening right now.
> openly the source to what they perceive as a major source of their income.
> Granted it will more likely happen with more specialized, high end hardware,
> unless it is the case where it is just too easy to install and use, to not
> buy, as with OSS.
There are two problems. Firstly the moment you add a binary only driver
no current vendor will ship it, nor for that matter are the likely to in
future. Think about the support issue. You've just tied yourself to a
vendor. How can say Red Hat support a third party binary module.
Secondly and related to this. Everyone will turn around and say "talk to
the module vendor". Most of us do that now. Bug reports I get that include
binary only modules go in the bitbucket and I tell people to talk to the
module vendor - only they can debug anything.
There are very few hardware vendors who have any real intellectual property
value in the code to drive their devices. There are exceptions but not that
many.
Also your comment on the high end is actually often the least problematic.
When the board does everything itself the OS interface tends to become
"put that here, fetch me 5 of those" and isolated from the magic in the cards.
The margin on low end hardware is low, very low. Vendors cant really afford
serious software development. Thats one reason things like USB are going
more and more to standards based interfaces. At the point where the connector
pricing is an issue (as in the choice of the USB connector), the margin
to write good software is not there.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Bob McElrath <mcelr...@draal.physics.wisc.edu> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.ovtba5v.1m7okrn@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424266993 Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 12:48:40 -0600 (EST) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9812201241410.5644-100000@draal.physics.wisc.edu> References: <fa.jsde27v.11k6j98@ifi.uio.no> To: Linux Kernel List <linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu On Sun, 20 Dec 1998, Dave Cinege wrote: > "Albert D. Cahalan" wrote: > > > It is unfortunate that the FSF doesn't hold any patents. I don't think > > that they like patents at all, but they need some so that they can trade. > > (if anything, patent issues could give GPL code an advantage over BSD code) > > Stallman once told me, "patents are a governement mandated monopoly". > I've thought alot about that. He's right. On Sun, 20 Dec 1998, Alan Cox wrote: > > to put it into the public domain after X years expired. A patent at least > > makes sure that the details are shared with the common community after a > > period of exclusive use by the inventor. Without patents, there would be a > > great many more trade secrets. > > _used to_. There is now an entire profession of writing patents in such > a way that even when they expire you cannot possibly reconstruct what they > were on about in full. > > In the current world trade secrets are less evil than patents. If someone > discovers something clever and patents it then they get a little piece > of paper granting them monopoly power. These are then traded to create a > little cabal of vendors who 'compete' in a very minimal fashion and lock > the entire market down while ripping customers off You guys forget that one of the main reasons for inventing patents in the first place is to protect someone who dumps a lot of money into developing something. If the "something" they sell based on that is easily reverse engineered and copied, then the reverse engineers have the upper hand, and always will. Trade secrets hinder development of new technology. Ideas are rarely "out of the blue". More often they are straightforward extrapolations of current ideas. By limiting the spread of ideas and information, you slow the growth of technology. All that said, patents still suck giant giraffe balls. There's got to be a better way to both protect the researcher, and encourage free exchange of ideas. Anyone want to see my file folder of potential multimillion-dollar products and companies to start that I will never have time for? -- Bob Bob McElrath (mcelr...@draal.physics.wisc.edu) Univ. of Wisconsin at Madison - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> You guys forget that one of the main reasons for
inventing patents in the
> first place is to protect someone who dumps a lot of money into developing
> something. If the "something" they sell based on that is easily reverse
> engineered and copied, then the reverse engineers have the upper hand, and
> always will.
Patents were a scheme by which individual non rich inventors traded
information
about their product for 17 years (which at the time was short term) protection
and monopoly rights.
That is no longer true, the whole justification is gone. Capitalism exists
to foster progress and competition in the interest of the people. Patents
are now part of a positively stalinist US corporate agenda and little
else.
> Anyone want to see my file folder of potential multimillion-dollar products
> and companies to start that I will never have time for?
Patent them all, wait 10 years for someone to release one of them and file
a multimillion dollar lawsuit with a law firm on a percentage winnings no
cost lose basis - its the American way.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Raul Miller <r...@test.legislate.com> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.cbl2hfv.r1ssr2@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424257631 Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 13:14:47 -0500 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <19981220131447.A15197@hazel> References: <fa.gaa3hlv.912to4@ifi.uio.no> To: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-References: <367C8EF3.AC241...@psychosis.com> <199812200731.CAA10...@saturn.cs.uml.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Mail-Followup-To: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Albert D. Cahalan <acaha...@cs.uml.edu> wrote: > Reality: Software patents are legal. You can get patent access if you > have patents to trade. Without patents to trade, free software will be > limited. Note why bzip2 is not as good as the original. Reality: software patents are never free, can be taken out on just about any permutaion of ideas, and are (in general) unknowable. Most software patents wouldn't stand up in court, but because the non-patent holder has to prove innocence (at least in the States), it's the threat of litigation under patent law that is the biggest problem, not anything else. What the free software community needs isn't so much a way of "buying into" some kind of partial rights to software patents, but a horde of people finding prior art, to defend free software. [I'm remembering how Don Lancaster beat a patent on a color organ by finding prior art -- from the 16th century. Seems to me that it's probable that we could find prior art on a lot of algorithmic patents if we broaden our search far enough. That said, I haven't had much time to pursue this kind of research.] -- Raul - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> What the free software community needs isn't so much a
way of "buying
> into" some kind of partial rights to software patents, but a horde of
> people finding prior art, to defend free software.
Thats I think the wrong approach. If US patents are like EU patents you
sign an affidavit that what you claim is the truth. It would be far
more effective to start finding clearly bogus patents and sueing the
lacky who signed their name to it for perjury.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: MOLNAR Ingo <mi...@chiara.csoma.elte.hu> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.ldo1hnv.a560o6@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424317370 Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 22:41:32 +0100 (CET) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.981220215028.8032B-100000@chiara.csoma.elte.hu> References: <fa.jufk5nv.1fi0kp8@ifi.uio.no> To: Alan Cox <a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu On Sun, 20 Dec 1998, Alan Cox wrote: > > What the free software community needs isn't so much a way of "buying > > into" some kind of partial rights to software patents, but a horde of > > people finding prior art, to defend free software. > > Thats I think the wrong approach. If US patents are like EU patents you > sign an affidavit that what you claim is the truth. It would be far > more effective to start finding clearly bogus patents and sueing the > lacky who signed their name to it for perjury. IBM should rather lobby to mend patent laws to exempt Linux, not the other way around :) the generic idea would be to create positive discrimination laws for free software: to make new laws to protect free software, acknowledging the fact that free software is in the public interest, thus free software deserves extra protection like academic research does: eg. patent law does not apply... (time to call your congressman, it's easy :) -- mingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Daniel Engstrom <da...@lillfab.se> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.fka4t9v.ijcj84@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424278206 Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 20:13:54 +0100 (CET) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <199812201914.UAA22916@www.lillfab.se> References: <fa.ovtba5v.1m7okrn@ifi.uio.no> To: mcelr...@draal.physics.wisc.edu Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: daniel.engst...@riksnett.no Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu On 20 Dec, Bob McElrath wrote: > You guys forget that one of the main reasons for inventing patents in the > first place is to protect someone who dumps a lot of money into developing > something. If the "something" they sell based on that is easily reverse > engineered and copied, then the reverse engineers have the upper hand, and > always will. Yeah, but most of the patents that are issued does not cover ideas that need this kind of protection. I think that maybe 10-100 patents/year world wide is a figure that is more reasonable. There should IMHO be an invention whose development cost is in excess of several 100 million USD to warrant this kind of protection. > Trade secrets hinder development of new technology. Ideas are rarely "out > of the blue". More often they are straightforward extrapolations of current > ideas. By limiting the spread of ideas and information, you slow the growth > of technology. Trade secrets hinder the development until they are reverse-engineered, which, if they that important, will happen in a few month or maybe a few years, if they are obscure. Parents on the other hand hinder development until they expire, typically 20 years I think. /Daniel -- Do you use MS Mail? If so please note that my email addresses are: dan...@lillfab.se - Work related. daniel.engst...@riksnett.no - Private. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: C S Hendrix <shend...@escape.widomaker.com> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/20 Message-ID: <fa.igfkmkv.p2se3u@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424303319 Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 15:45:38 -0500 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <199812202045.PAA23275@escape.widomaker.com> References: <fa.fka4t9v.ijcj84@ifi.uio.no> To: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Reply-To: shend...@escape.widomaker.com Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu In message <199812201914.UAA22...@www.lillfab.se>, Daniel Engstrom writes: > Yeah, but most of the patents that are issued does not cover ideas that > need this kind of protection. I think that maybe 10-100 patents/year > world wide is a figure that is more reasonable. There should IMHO be an > invention whose development cost is in excess of several 100 million USD > to warrant this kind of protection. What a minute. If I personally spend US $10K on something, I want protection too. In today's world, some corporation comes along and screws me rotten if I don't have a patent or SOMETHING to protect myself. I don't really like patents, but at the same time I don't believe the amount of money spent is important. An idea is an idea, no matter how much time and money it took. Do I deserve no protection just because I came up with a true invention in my garage? Any company that spends $100 million US probably has less need for protection than I do. They can develop in secret and handle production by contract. If they are sucessful, they keep on being so by further innovation. If not, well then that's what competition is about. You cannot have sustained innovation if one remains king of the hill for too long. > Trade secrets hinder the development until they are reverse-engineered, > which, if they that important, will happen in a few month or maybe a few > years, if they are obscure. Parents on the other hand hinder development > until they expire, typically 20 years I think. True, perhaps the term is too long for certain kinds. Software I just have a very hard time accepting patents for. But 20 years is really too long in today's world for even some hardware. -- Shannon - shend...@widomaker.com - www.widomaker.com/~shendrix/myresume.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny." -- Unknown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> What a minute. If I personally spend US $10K on
something, I want
> protection too. In today's world, some corporation comes along and
> screws me rotten if I don't have a patent or SOMETHING to protect
> myself.
$10K, Oh forget it, they countersue for something frivolous you go bankrupt
they take the patent as part payment, end of problem
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Wesley Morgan <morg...@engr.sc.edu> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/21 Message-ID: <fa.mpcuhvv.shsdr5@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424384541 Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 22:46:39 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9812202246170.11659-100000@by-tor.tacorp.net> To: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu X-Sender: by-...@by-tor.tacorp.net Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu On Sun, 20 Dec 1998, D.A. Harris wrote: > It wouldn't surprise me to see more of this occur. Especially when you > have propietary hardware manufacturers that write the drivers and interfaces > for their hardware when want to interface with Linux, and not release > openly the source to what they perceive as a major source of their income. > Granted it will more likely happen with more specialized, high end hardware, > unless it is the case where it is just too easy to install and use, to not > buy, as with OSS. Actually, I have to disagree with you. As a matter of fact, I think that vendors should warm to the idea of open source drivers. Would you ever PAY for a driver for some hardware you just bought? No, I wouldn't. An open source driver released for Linux would be a great starting point for the FreeBSD guys to pick up and hack their own version -- less work for the manufacturer. My opinion is this... UNIX software has traditionally been largely "open source" (I hate all these buzzwords... "innovate", IT, "open source"). Windows software has (almost) always been binary only. Why? (Other than monetary issues) Because your average Windows/DOS user wouldn't have the slightest idea what to do with a makefile. Not to mention the lack of widely available FREE compilers for DOS. Since there is no "standard development" compiler, how can you be certain that software developed under Borland tools will build with another compiler, etc. A massive source of headaches for software developers. Where UNIX has had a strong common thread (gcc and other GNU tools or the respective vendor-supplied tools) which propelled it towards an open source model, Windows/DOS lacked these tools and has spent the last fifteen-odd years becoming firmly convinced that binary is the only way to go. So you can see that even if open source in in our opinions inherently better, it has not been a viable option for the Windows/DOS platform. UNIX users are generally both more capable and comfortable when dealing with source code instead of binaries. Unfortunately since they say between 80-90% of all computers run the traditionally binary-only platforms, we won't see much movement towards open source unless we can either irrevocably prove that open source is better for all platforms or become a much larger player. Linux is just moving up from being a pinch-hitter to the starting lineup (Sorry for the baseball analogy, but hey I'm American). Comments on the GPL discussion: From the GPL 2: Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation. What this tells me is that if you are working on continuously updated software it would be in your best interest to release under a specific version of the GPL. That would prevent any earler or later version from applying. If Linus is afraid of IBM or someone else bribing or bullying the FSF into releasing a weakened GPL 3, he can simply change the license to GPL 2 only. And since Linux development is constant, he could change the license to GPL 3 at any time he wanted. The only time it would benefit you to specify "any later version" would be if you were releasing software and letting it sit without planning on updating it or the license (which hopefully will never happen with Linux). WM - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> So you can see that even if open source in in our
opinions inherently
> better, it has not been a viable option for the Windows/DOS platform. UNIX
> users are generally both more capable and comfortable when dealing with
> source code instead of binaries. Unfortunately since they say between
> 80-90% of all computers run the traditionally binary-only platforms, we
> won't see much movement towards open source unless we can either
I disagree most definitely. 90% of the people moving into Linux nowdays
don't make use of the CD of source code. A fair number of them understand
what it is about and why it matters.
Binaries/source is nothing but a packaging issue. If Debian came as a CD
of sources only with nothing but a kernel, libc and gcc/binutils compiled
it wouldn't work either
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/21
Message-ID: <fa.fd7nhsv.134qfr1@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 424400008
Original-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 21:30:15 -0700 (MST)
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-Id: <199812210430.VAA25953@wijiji.santafe.edu>
References: <fa.hcvgf1v.mheg8l@ifi.uio.no>
To: aar...@vitelus.com
Original-References: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9812192256470.14192-100...@vitelus.com>
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Reply-To: r...@gnu.org
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
I am afraid that large, proprietary companies with intrest in the
Linux market will lead to the death of GNU/Linux.
There is certainly a danger, but we are not entirely helpless against
it. We can reduce the danger, if we teach the millions of new
GNU/Linux users to value freedom--not just convenience and high tech.
Each additional user who starts to insist on freedom
makes us stronger, so if we reach just a fraction of the users,
we are still doing a considerable amount of good for our community.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Riley Williams <r...@bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/21
Message-ID: <fa.l0tjp0v.1b1c5r1@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 424455373
Original-Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 10:58:01 +0000 (GMT)
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.981221104816.20581B-100000@ps.cus.umist.ac.uk>
References: <fa.fd7nhsv.134qfr1@ifi.uio.no>
To: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org>
X-Sender: r...@ps.cus.umist.ac.uk
X-Authentication-Warning: ps.cus.umist.ac.uk: rhw owned process doing -bs
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Hi Richard.
> I am afraid that large, proprietary companies with intrest in the
> Linux market will lead to the death of GNU/Linux.
> There is certainly a danger, but we are not entirely helpless
> against it. We can reduce the danger, if we teach the millions of
> new GNU/Linux users to value freedom--not just convenience and high
> tech. Each additional user who starts to insist on freedom makes us
> stronger, so if we reach just a fraction of the users, we are still
> doing a considerable amount of good for our community.
If this "freedom" means that we become slaves to ANYBODY (including
the FSF) about ANYTHING, then it's not worth having.
As far as I can tell, your insistance on everybody using the term
"GNU/Linux" is because YOU want to enslave all of us into YOUR
organisation. I for one am NOT interested in that, so I will continue
to refer to the real name of the product, and I suggest you start
doing the same...
LL IIIIIIIIII NN NN UU UU XX XX
LL II NNN NN UU UU XX XX
LL II NNNN NN UU UU XX XX
LL II NN NN NN UU UU XXXX
LL II NN NN NN UU UU XX
LL II NN NN NN UU UU XXXX
LL II NN NNNN UU UU XX XX
LL II NN NNN UU UU XX XX
LLLLLLLLLL IIIIIIIIII NN NN UUUUUU XX XX
(C)1991-1998, Linus Torvalds
Best wishes from Riley.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/22
Message-ID: <fa.fe6lg5v.1054c39@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 424778984
Original-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 02:07:18 -0700 (MST)
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-Id: <199812220907.CAA02597@wijiji.santafe.edu>
References: <fa.l0tjp0v.1b1c5r1@ifi.uio.no>
To: r...@bigfoot.com
Original-References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.981221104816.20581B-100...@ps.cus.umist.ac.uk>
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Reply-To: r...@gnu.org
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
As far as I can tell, your insistance on everybody using the term
"GNU/Linux" is because YOU want to enslave all of us into YOUR
organisation.
I ask people to use the term "GNU/Linux", in order to help inform
other people about the history of the operating system in question.
Many people think that the development of the system as a whole
started in 1991, when Linux was written. Actually it was started in
1984 by the GNU project.
If you talk with the people who use the term "GNU/Linux", you'll find
that I actually have no power over them; I can't force them to do
anything. I wouldn't want to, even if I could. I can only point out
the facts, and ask people to act accordingly. Then they make their
own decisions.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/22
Message-ID: <fa.femlgdv.17l4cr8@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 424780419
Original-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 02:08:18 -0700 (MST)
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-Id: <199812220908.CAA02678@wijiji.santafe.edu>
References: <fa.bh8r6qv.1jlse20@ifi.uio.no>
To: dale...@cs.net.pl
Original-References: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9812192256470.14192-100...@vitelus.com>
<199812210430.VAA25...@wijiji.santafe.edu> <367E11A1.477E2...@cs.net.pl>
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Reply-To: r...@gnu.org
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
PS. Whot does this have in common with the inner workings of the
Linux kernel?
All the detailed questions about the inner workings of Linux would be
of no importance to anyone, if we did not have an operating system to
use it in. And that operating system was developed for idealistic
reasons.
Freedom includes the right to sneer at freedom; no one can force you
to care about anything. But that won't change the fact that the
idealism you despise is the reason why your operating system exists,
and the reason why it is free software. And the system is likely to
remain free, only as long as people who care about their freedom make
the effort to keep it free.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/From: Riccardo Facchetti <fiz...@tin.it> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/22 Message-ID: <fa.iq8gh1v.1f0qnb1@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424808319 Original-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 12:56:51 +0000 (/etc/localtime) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.03.9812221256200.2645-100000@azuth.tin.it> References: <fa.fe6lg5v.1054c39@ifi.uio.no> To: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: fiz...@tin.it Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, Richard Stallman wrote: > I ask people to use the term "GNU/Linux", in order to help inform > other people about the history of the operating system in question. > Many people think that the development of the system as a whole > started in 1991, when Linux was written. Actually it was started in > 1984 by the GNU project. I don't care how a distribution is called (GNU/Linux seems to me a name good as another). The real problem is that you are discussing about distribution's name on linux-kernel mailing list. Here the principal subject is the kernel. You can not say that Linux kernel itself is to be coupled with GNU. So while I can agree that a distribution can be quite reasonably called GNU/Linux I can not agree that the kernel itself be called GNU/Linux. On this mailing list we talk about kernels so in this place, Richard please, call it simply Linux and not GNU/Linux. You are talking with people that have devoted lot of time in developing the kernel and you show quite a bit of lack of respect for that people insisting to call linux GNU/Linux. > If you talk with the people who use the term "GNU/Linux", you'll find > that I actually have no power over them; I can't force them to do > anything. I wouldn't want to, even if I could. I can only point out > the facts, and ask people to act accordingly. Then they make their > own decisions. I have _never_ seen a single person using the term GNU/Linux on this mailing list, except you. And, as a last thing, I'm sure that all the people on this list have much respect for GNU and your efforts, past, present and future. Please show a bit more respect for Linus and all the other people and their efforts to make the linux kernel the best underlying structure (and note here that I have not called it an OS knowing your definition of OS) GNU software have ever running on: call the linux kernel "Linux" as Linus wanted to call it and all the people, at least here, love to call it and not "GNU/Linux". Ciao, Riccardo. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Wayne Schlitt <wa...@midwestcs.com> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/22 Message-ID: <fa.mvtbenv.12jajjn@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 424898986 Original-Date: 22 Dec 1998 10:43:36 -0600 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <x4btkwp1on.fsf@backbone.midwestcs.com> References: <fa.iq8gh1v.1f0qnb1@ifi.uio.no> To: fiz...@tin.it Original-References: <Pine.LNX.4.03.9812221256200.2645-100...@azuth.tin.it> X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu In <Pine.LNX.4.03.9812221256200.2645-100...@azuth.tin.it> Riccardo Facchetti <fiz...@tin.it> writes: > . You can not say that Linux kernel itself is to be > coupled with GNU. Ever try to compile the kernel with something other than gcc/gas/gnu-ld/etc? > I have _never_ seen a single person using the term GNU/Linux on this > mailing list, except you. You must not read closely, or you forget easily. Check the archives. -wayne -- Wayne Schlitt can not assert the truth of all statements in this article and still be consistent. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
> > . You can not say that Linux kernel itself is to be
> > coupled with GNU.
>
> Ever try to compile the kernel with something other than gcc/gas/gnu-ld/etc?
Been there, done that for Linux 8086. A recommended procedure for those
who need to remember why gcc is nice
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/24
Message-ID: <fa.fd7hh5v.1340f34@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 425364321
Original-Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 18:17:02 -0700 (MST)
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-Id: <199812240117.SAA28823@wijiji.santafe.edu>
References: <fa.iq8gh1v.1f0qnb1@ifi.uio.no>
To: fiz...@tin.it
Original-References: <Pine.LNX.4.03.9812221256200.2645-100...@azuth.tin.it>
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Reply-To: r...@gnu.org
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please show a
bit more respect for Linus and all the other people and their efforts...:
call the linux kernel "Linux" as Linus wanted to call it
I always call the kernel Linux, for precisely that reason. Linus
Torvalds started that program, and he says the name is Linux, so I
call it Linux out of respect for him.
I ask people to do the same thing for the operating system as a whole.
It was started in 1984 by the GNU Project. For years, before Linux
was written, we developed many components (not just "tools") of this
system, and we did so as steps in the development of the system as a
whole. (See the GNU Manifesto.)
Linux (the kernel) doesn't come from the GNU project, and we never try
to claim any credit for it. When people say that the GNU project
"developed important parts of Linux", we explain that we don't deserve
that honor, because none of Linux is our work. And we never call
Linux a GNU program. (Some people have misinterpreted this as a
gesture of rejection of Linux; actually, it is because we're not
entitled to say so.)
But while the GNU project played no role in the writing of Linux, it
started the development of the operating system as a whole. That's
what the GNU project was and is about. Writing dozens of programs
such as GCC, Bash and libc--not only "tools"--was just a part this
larger project.
The system version most of us are using is the combination of Linux
and the GNU system. "GNU/Linux" is a good way to describe that
combination, and when I write that, it always means the whole
combination. The kernel is simply Linux.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/From: j...@pa.dec.com (Jim Gettys) Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1998/12/24 Message-ID: <fa.h1rb2ov.ikmsar@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 425567807 Original-Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:58:05 -0800 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <9812241858.AA08392@pachyderm.pa.dec.com> References: <fa.fd7hh5v.1340f34@ifi.uio.no> To: r...@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu > Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu > From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org> > Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 18:17:02 -0700 (MST) > To: fiz...@tin.it > Cc: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu > Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux > ----- > Please show a > bit more respect for Linus and all the other people and their efforts...: > call the linux kernel "Linux" as Linus wanted to call it > > I always call the kernel Linux, for precisely that reason. Linus > Torvalds started that program, and he says the name is Linux, so I > call it Linux out of respect for him. > > I ask people to do the same thing for the operating system as a whole. > It was started in 1984 by the GNU Project. For years, before Linux > was written, we developed many components (not just "tools") of this > system, and we did so as steps in the development of the system as a > whole. (See the GNU Manifesto.) > > Linux (the kernel) doesn't come from the GNU project, and we never try > to claim any credit for it. When people say that the GNU project > "developed important parts of Linux", we explain that we don't deserve > that honor, because none of Linux is our work. And we never call > Linux a GNU program. (Some people have misinterpreted this as a > gesture of rejection of Linux; actually, it is because we're not > entitled to say so.) > > But while the GNU project played no role in the writing of Linux, it > started the development of the operating system as a whole. That's > what the GNU project was and is about. Writing dozens of programs > such as GCC, Bash and libc--not only "tools"--was just a part this > larger project. > > The system version most of us are using is the combination of Linux > and the GNU system. "GNU/Linux" is a good way to describe that > combination, and when I write that, it always means the whole > combination. The kernel is simply Linux. > One might as well also say that the whole system should be called "GNU/X/Linux"; the X Window system contribution, in terms of number of lines of code of software, is very large. People should remember that not only "hackers" contributed, but a number of major companies, including my own, contributed large amounts to that code base, under fully free terms (where the UNIX vendors went wrong was stuff built on top, and the silly GUI wars of the beginning of the decade). In terms of total effort and number of lines of code, both GNU and X represent much larger efforts than the base operating system. But the reality is that this is too cumbersome, whether you say "GNU/Linux" or "GNU/X/Linux. The market and men on the street now associates "Linux" with the whole combination, for better or for worse. I'm personally very gratified that our (in this case, the X Window system community, GNU community, and Linux community) are affecting a large and growing number of people, rather than withering and dying from the effects of Redmond. So long as Linus gives credit where credit is due to the various groups that make up this community, there is little to be gained (and arguably, much to be lost) by confusing people with a more complex nomencature. Obviously, when writing for a technical audience, (rather than the mass audience), being more clear what you mean may make sense and give credit where credit is due. But lets not confuse the mass market, which has enough trouble understanding Linux as it is. - Jim Gettys - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <allb...@kf8nh.apk.net>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/24
Message-ID: <fa.knn5lov.10ismgd@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 425574042
Original-Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 14:21:10 -0500
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-Id: <199812241921.OAA32097@rushlight.kf8nh.apk.net>
References: <fa.h1rb2ov.ikmsar@ifi.uio.no>
To: j...@pa.dec.com (Jim Gettys)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
In message <9812241858.AA08...@pachyderm.pa.dec.com>, Jim Gettys writes:
+-----
| > From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org>
| >
| > The system version most of us are using is the combination of Linux
| > and the GNU system. "GNU/Linux" is a good way to describe that
| > combination, and when I write that, it always means the whole
| > combination. The kernel is simply Linux.
|
| One might as well also say that the whole system should be called
| "GNU/X/Linux"; the X Window system contribution, in terms of number of
| lines of code of software, is very large. People should remember that
+--->8
And many of Linux's user-space networking utilities (and some significant
chunks of the kernel --- not to mention at least one SCSI driver and
probably other drivers) come from our colleagues in BSD development. And
then there's the Samba folks, etc. If we must name the system to
acknowledge all the contributing projects, we're going to end up with a
decidedly Entish name. :-)
--
brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] allb...@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator [WAY too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu
carnegie mellon / electrical and computer engineering KF8NH
We are Linux. Resistance is an indication that you missed the point.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/26
Message-ID: <fa.hs9fhpv.4g5ol@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 425977041
Original-Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 14:08:46 -0500
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-Id: <199812261908.OAA07552@psilocin.gnu.org>
References: <fa.knn5lov.10ismgd@ifi.uio.no>
To: allb...@kf8nh.apk.net
Original-References: <199812241921.OAA32...@rushlight.kf8nh.apk.net>
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Reply-To: r...@gnu.org
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
If we must name the system to
acknowledge all the contributing projects, we're going to end up with a
decidedly Entish name. :-)
You are right: we cannot possibly list, in the name of the system, all
the projects that wrote programs which turned out to be useful to
include in the operating system. There are too many of them. So it
wouldn't be valid for any one project to say, "Mention us in the
system's name, because we wrote some of these programs".
The operating system should be named from the project that started
developing it, the project that went beyond writing individual free
programs. The GNU Project did this. We set the goal of *a free
operating system*, dedicated years of strenuous effort to that goal,
and in the process developed more of the system than any other
project. We gave the system the name "GNU" (which is why the project
is the GNU Project).
But I think it's proper to add six more characters, "/Linux", to give
credit to Linus Torvalds for his contribution. We cannot mention
every contributor, but we can mention one especially important
contributor. The GNU Project started development of the system, and
in a sense Linus finished it.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/26
Message-ID: <fa.hupfhpv.2kg5oo@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 425979157
Original-Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 14:09:18 -0500
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-Id: <199812261909.OAA07597@psilocin.gnu.org>
References: <fa.mod405v.bhisa2@ifi.uio.no>
To: g...@oriole.sbay.org
Original-References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.981220134531.1981f-100...@calvin.captech.com>
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Reply-To: r...@gnu.org
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Well, then. Maybe what the world needs is a new kind of patent. Maybe
there should be something like a GNU Prior Art Registry where a technique
can be registered (for a fee which is used to maintain the registry) and
is freely redistributable in Free code but would require a royalty for
non-GPL use. This protects the inventor from exploitation yet allows
one to share an idea with the community and also prevents something from
being patented by someone else. It would provide a standard method of
registration that should be able to hold up in court if someone tries to
patent the concept later.
I can imagine three ways this could be done.
* Any patent holders can do this voluntarily. We may as well ask them
to.
* Patent holders might be encouraged to join a patent pool which makes
this one condition of membership. Some people are talking about this
idea now; if it gets off the ground, there will be an announcement.
* There could be a change in patent law which either requires this, or
makes patents easier to get if they allow this than if they do not.
Of course, convincing governments to make this change would not be
easy.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/From: "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <allb...@kf8nh.apk.net>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/26
Message-ID: <fa.km73ngv.103in80@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 426027152
Original-Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 18:21:53 -0500
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-Id: <199812262321.SAA03766@rushlight.kf8nh.apk.net>
References: <fa.hs9fhpv.4g5ol@ifi.uio.no>
To: r...@gnu.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
In message <199812261908.OAA07...@psilocin.gnu.org>, Richard Stallman writes:
+-----
| If we must name the system to
| acknowledge all the contributing projects, we're going to end up with a
| decidedly Entish name. :-)
|
| The operating system should be named from the project that started
| developing it, the project that went beyond writing individual free
| programs. The GNU Project did this. We set the goal of *a free
| operating system*, dedicated years of strenuous effort to that goal,
| and in the process developed more of the system than any other
| project. We gave the system the name "GNU" (which is why the project
| is the GNU Project).
+--->8
And some years ago you gave us (i.e. the Linux community) to understand that
"the system" was to be based on the Hurd, and that we were at best
hangers-on. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that this is the core of
discontent: as if Andrew Tanenbaum were to suddenly start advertizing Minix
as "the forerunner of Linux".
| in a sense Linus finished it.
+--->8
Rather a late admission....
--
brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] allb...@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator [WAY too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu
carnegie mellon / electrical and computer engineering KF8NH
We are Linux. Resistance is an indication that you missed the point.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Date: 1998/12/29
Message-ID: <fa.i08dhpv.54e5on@ifi.uio.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 426805748
Original-Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 09:50:02 -0500
Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Original-Message-Id: <199812291450.JAA10009@psilocin.gnu.org>
References: <fa.km73ngv.103in80@ifi.uio.no>
To: allb...@kf8nh.apk.net
Original-References: <199812262321.SAA03...@rushlight.kf8nh.apk.net>
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu
Organization: Internet mailing list
Reply-To: r...@gnu.org
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
And some years ago you gave us (i.e. the Linux community) to understand that
"the system" was to be based on the Hurd,
That's true. We are developing the Hurd, which is an advanced kernel.
We started the Hurd because there was no free kernel, and a complete
free operating system requires a kernel. (Linux did not exist then.)
We're continuing to work on the Hurd because after doing so much work,
it would be a shame not to finish it.
and that we were at best
hangers-on.
The Hurd isn't meant to express any opinion about any person. I'm
sorry if you took it that way, but that meaning was not intended.
I use GNU/Linux all the time, and that's what I recommend to everyone
who asks what system to install. That's what we install at the FSF,
by preference, when we get a machine. If this makes some people
"hangers on", I must be one of them.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/From: Richard Stallman <r...@gnu.org> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1999/01/01 Message-ID: <fa.huo1gpv.2ku4on@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 427712949 Original-Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 05:30:46 -0500 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <199901011030.FAA13097@psilocin.gnu.org> References: <fa.h0rf10v.ikiu2v@ifi.uio.no> To: j...@pa.dec.com Original-References: <9812281840.AA21...@pachyderm.pa.dec.com> X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Reply-To: r...@gnu.org Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu If you as an individual use the term "GNU/Linux" for the operating system that's the combination of Linux and GNU, you won't change what "the world calls" the system. But "the world" doesn't really do anything; individuals do. You can't change the whole world by yourself, but you can change part of it. Each person who decides to use the name "GNU/Linux" helps to spread the word about where the operating system as a whole came from, and also helps users understand the difference between the whole system and the kernel. You can help inform hundreds of people by typing 4 extra characters, a few times a day. It is hard to find a more efficient use of your time. You will also help inform the users that the system exists because of a group of people who stood up for a principle of freedom, people who insisted that freedom should apply to the whole of the system, and no less. In a time when most of the voices heard in the community say we should sacrifice principles when they become inconvenient, it's important for users to know that their system did not come from that approach. Users should know that a firm stand accomplished something that "pragmatic flexibility" would never have done. I hope you will join me and the others who use the term "GNU/Linux". - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acaha...@cs.uml.edu> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1999/01/02 Message-ID: <fa.gaadhdv.81sug1@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 427950771 Original-Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 03:33:00 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <199901020833.DAA24808@saturn.cs.uml.edu> To: linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Richard Stallman writes: > You will also help inform the users that the system exists because of > a group of people who stood up for a principle of freedom, people who > insisted that freedom should apply to the whole of the system, and no > less. > > In a time when most of the voices heard in the community say we should > sacrifice principles when they become inconvenient, it's important for > users to know that their system did not come from that approach. > Users should know that a firm stand accomplished something that > "pragmatic flexibility" would never have done. > > I hope you will join me and the others who use the term "GNU/Linux". No. The system exists because the Internet (not commonly available before the early 1990's) allows collaborative development. Linux might have died under the original licence, but BSD escaped from AT&T with plenty of tools and most of a kernel. We'd be using that now instead. My system is i386-redhat-linux or just Linux. It is quite arrogant for the FSF to call it otherwise. Not many people respect a person who tries to claim credit for everything like you do. Because of this, I refuse to ever mention any of the GNU and FSF issues to anybody learning about the system. You don't even deserve to be mentioned anymore. When I see i386-redhat-linux on all the FSF stuff I compile, I will reconsider that decision. Until then, I hope others will join me in ignoring you as punishment. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <ty...@MIT.EDU> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1999/01/03 Message-ID: <fa.c3e1ogv.g5op9b@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 428236411 Original-Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 20:26:26 -0500 Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-Id: <199901030126.UAA27443@dcl> References: <fa.gaadhdv.81sug1@ifi.uio.no> To: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acaha...@cs.uml.edu> Address: 1 Amherst St., Cambridge, MA 02139 X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Organization: Internet mailing list Phone: (617) 253-8091 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 03:33:00 -0500 (EST) From: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acaha...@cs.uml.edu> The system exists because the Internet (not commonly available before the early 1990's) allows collaborative development. Linux might have died under the original licence, but BSD escaped from AT&T with plenty of tools and most of a kernel. We'd be using that now instead. My system is i386-redhat-linux or just Linux. It is quite arrogant for the FSF to call it otherwise. Not many people respect a person who tries to claim credit for everything like you do. Because of this, I refuse to ever mention any of the GNU and FSF issues to anybody learning about the system. You don't even deserve to be mentioned anymore. When I see i386-redhat-linux on all the FSF stuff I compile, I will reconsider that decision. Until then, I hope others will join me in ignoring you as punishment. Albert, I think many people will agree with you --- personally, I just grabbed a recent config.guess from the FSF, found to my disgust that it had been hacked to use RMS-approved Linux/GNU terminology, and did a 's/linux-gnu/linux/g' to the config.guess before putting it into my e2fsprogs development tree. BUT the linux-kernel mailing really isn't the place to flame about patent issues, licensing issues, or about whether or not RMS is trying to salvage his bruised ego because Linux has succeeded where the Hurd has failed. Whether or not this is the case, this list isn't the place for any of these topics. So, can we _please_ drop this debate, and move it to somewhere more appropriate, such as the bar during one of the upcoming Linux conferences, or perhaps to alt.flame? Tnx..... - Ted - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Andrea Arcangeli <and...@e-mind.com> Subject: Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux Date: 1999/01/04 Message-ID: <fa.imenu0v.f127oa@ifi.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 428597960 Original-Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1999 21:00:31 +0100 (CET) Sender: owner-linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu Original-Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.990103205430.15391A-100000@laser.bogus> References: <fa.c3e1ogv.g5op9b@ifi.uio.no> To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <ty...@MIT.EDU> X-Sender: and...@laser.bogus Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-ker...@vger.rutgers.edu X-PgP-Public-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Organization: Internet mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel X-Loop: majord...@vger.rutgers.edu On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > Because of this, I refuse to ever mention any of the GNU and FSF > issues to anybody learning about the system. You don't even deserve Nobody ask you to use gcc or its derivates. Nobody ask you to use bash. Nobody ask you to use emacs. Nobody ask you to use everything developed by GNU. Feel free to not use them and ignore GNU. BTW, I am _sure_ you never took a look at the gcc sources. Please take a look at it, try hacking it. Then you' ll start using GNU/Linux. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/