XFree86 distributed under a new license; distro's making a fuss: why??
GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
XFree86 distributed under a new license; distro's making a fuss: why??
Hi, I was over at slashdot just now. They had the story that because XFree86 4.4 will be distributed under an "unacceptable" license (license version 1.1) , many linux distributions and the bsd's will not be shipping with XFree86. But reading the license , I just can't figure out why. You will find an explanation here, at the openbsd site, but is this really just about words? Or is there more to it?
Can someone shed some light on this for me?
distros are just to lazy to include the acknolegments, and copywrite notices in there products just to please the xfree86 project, i dont see anything wrong with it, its not like im planing on redistributing this, so i dont have to wory about these lisences, i just need to wory about configuring, and compile this when i decide to get a new comp and use the newst software, so let those distros do whatever, o and i just noticed, its also probly cuse there to lazy to not use the oficial name of the project (look at reason #4)
Basically, every app would have to have 'This software uses compenets developed by XFree86' or something like that somewhere where the user might see it, in the 'about' box for example. Not only is this kinda logistically impossible at the moment for many distros, but it also not allowed under the GPL. Check this story for more info on that particular. In the end, if things don't get resolved, some distros might move over to an alternative to XFree, like freedesktop.org X Server or Xouvert.
Fedora, Gentoo, Mandrake, Debian and OpenBSD have all jumped ship.
IMO this is the stupidest, most ridiculous, selfish thing, that the XFree86 Project leads have done. IMO they have just illegitimized themselves in the eyes of the entire Linux community. When Alan Cox sends e-mails criticzing the license and requesting withdrawal of his code, you know that things are pretty bad.
Looks like Xouvert and xserver are going to get a lot more publicity.
Originally posted by schatoor So this means that every app using the GUI would have to include copyright notices. Is that right? Hmm that does seem like unacceptable.
What is unreasonable is that the sheer size and complexity, both physical and historical, of the XFree86 code means that EVERY SINGLE APPLICATION that uses XFree86 4.4 in any way must include a full and complete list of contributors. Such a list may be larger than the entire program itself.
O i didnet relize that when i posts, NOW I PISSED!!!, i hope that the apps out there are compatible with regualr standard X, and that if we change the x server programs from xfree86 to some other one itll just sldie right in without work,
now back to the pissed part, WHO DO TEHY THINK TEHY ARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
apps should be made to be compatible with a stanard xlib protocol, does that mean tehy are trying to take over the entire x windowing system by forcing any app that could run in xfree86 to include some stupid commet?
What makes it especially upsetting is that the XFree86 developers moved unilaterally without adequate and conspicuous consultation with the community at large. They may have discussed this with a few of the higher-profile developers, but they did NOT discuss it with the community at large. THAT is one of the reasons why the community is so upset at the XFree86 Project's new license.
ok, thats it, i always thought xfree86 was ahrd to configure and long to compile, Time to look at other free versons of x *starts downloading some source code to whatever other free versons ther are*
Originally posted by SciYro ok, thats it, i always thought xfree86 was ahrd to configure and long to compile, Time to look at other free versons of x *starts downloading some source code to whatever other free versons ther are*
i decideed on freedesktop.org, i like some of the projects they got going, must whatch closly at the the XCB/XCL libs, i want try em when they come out
iv completely dleeted everytheing xfree86 put on my system (exepct mybe some locales, but i dont wanna short thu that if they mixed things up
almost got all of the x libs downloaded, man, alot to download, so i only downlaod like 1 thing every 5 minutes cuse im to busy reading everyhting
hehe and all just to show my disgust over what there doing at xfree86.org
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
