Care to share: SlackMATE

ReaperX7 · 06-09-2015, 05:12 AM

Seriously... You know it bad yet plausible when others devalue each others work, but to devalue you own, wow... That's fucked up.

kikinovak · 06-09-2015, 05:15 AM

A curt reminder of letter-of-the-law vs. good practice. While there is no law prohibiting loud belching and farting in public, I will avoid doing this while invited at the stepparents' table in order to avoid any raised eyebrows.

brianL · 06-09-2015, 05:17 AM

Everybody can have the same ideas, think the same thoughts. Nobody owns thinking. But if someone expresses those ideas in a certain way, and commits them to paper or whatever, then that person has the right to claim ownership.
I was going to ramble on about Shakespeare, Laws vs Liberty, SlackBuilds compared to novels, etc, but I've changed my mind.

Darth Vader · 06-09-2015, 05:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a4z

there is no question,
what you can not do is using the other script and remove the license information
you can remove it from your work.

Like I said, I not started from another script, but, on purpose, from a clear previously work called Slackbuild.org Template. Where I'm encouraged to write my license information. So, when all you have done is to make only little modifications to template, as program name, program version, its configure script and the make parameters (who all are conditioned by program specification, and you cannot do in another way), we arrive at very similar results. That's the problem, when we combine with the Copyright claims.

Darth Vader · 06-09-2015, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianL

Everybody can have the same ideas, think the same thoughts. Nobody owns thinking. But if someone expresses those ideas in a certain way, and commits them to paper or whatever, then that person has the right to claim ownership.
I was going to ramble on about Shakespeare, Laws vs Liberty, SlackBuilds compared to novels, etc, but I've changed my mind.

In my opinion, in a SlackBuild, to generate a successfully correct Slackware Package, exactly is it the problem: you should express ideas in a certain way.

1. The specifications of a Slackware Package.
2. The specifications of the named program.
3. The build method specified by the named program.
4. The (additional) files specified by the named program.

Combine this with a encouraged Standard Template and you arrive to very similar "code" to another build scripts.

Finally add that shiny Copyright to very similar build-scripts and... you see the results.

Yes, there are meta-builds, like the Roby's X11 or Eric's KDE4/5, or Eric's VLC, which I really believe that should by claimed, but for simple builds, maybe is better for all of us to pass the Copyright directly to the method creator, Patrick V.

ReaperX7 · 06-09-2015, 05:40 AM

Yes, but it's far too obvious Darth, especially the version numbering scheme which obviously was a clear copy, and the fact that a hyphenated number scheme will screw up Slackpkg severely, and because I used that myself on accident, to which I thanked ponce, willy, and others for pointing out, not to forget mentioning Slackworks contributor Aaditya Bagga who forked my work and has contributed to improving it, have all pointed out the flaw, and how to fix it.

Yet again Darth, good job on "your" work.

Seriously, I need a beer now, and a damned good one...

Darth Vader · 06-09-2015, 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReaperX7

Seriously... You know it bad yet plausible when others devalue each others work, but to devalue you own, wow... That's fucked up.

You talk about that libclc.Slackbuild which I presented? Well, was written for fun, in a coffee pause, to confirm my hypothesis...

Don't worry, in Real Life I maintain an entire Linux distribution, true, very similar with Slackware, but to not be afraid that I will steal your work, to known that I use a custom application, written in C/C++, a Package Builder, called (very original, right?) pkgBuild, which while generate Slackware compatible packages, use for scripting some SPECS very similar with those used by RPMBUILD.

P.S. If someone is interested to use, too, this pkgBuild, for it's advantages and even to avoid the Copyright Claims when almost every simple Slackbuild is copyrighted, there is a (seriously old) example of SPEC used by pkgBuild. Yep, the thing exists from A.D. 2009. Think about something like a RPMBUILD with its all bells, but for Slackware. If there is interest, maybe I can publish the application...

Code:

# pkgBuild Spec for <pkgbuild> package

Name:    pkgbuild
Version: 1.0.46
Release: 1

Source:  {__name}-{__version}.tar.xz


%package

Requires: coreutils >= 7.4-%{__arch}-1
Requires: curl >= 7.19.6-%{__arch}-1
Requires: cxxlibs >= 6.0.10-%{__arch}-1 | gcc-g++ >= 4.3.3-%{__arch}-3
Requires: cyrus-sasl >= 2.1.23-%{__arch}-1
Requires: gcc >= 4.3.3-%{__arch}-3
Requires: glibc-solibs >= 2.9-%{__arch}-3
Requires: libidn >= 1.5-%{__arch}-1
Requires: openldap-client >= 2.3.43-%{__arch}-1
Requires: openssl >= 0.9.8l-%{__arch}-1 | openssl-solibs >= 0.9.8l-%{__arch}-1
Requires: zlib >= 1.2.3-%{__arch}-2

Description:

#-----handy-ruler----------------------------------------------------#
%{__name} (Slackware Packages Builder)

pkgBuild is a advanced packages builder for the Slackware packages,
which use a scripting language similar to RPM's Spec.

pkgBuild greatly simplifies the creation of the Slackware packages,
automating the required post-processing and other tasks like the
download and verify the checksum of the source tarballs.

pkgBuild is written and maintained by DARKSTAR Linux Project.


%begin

%setup

%configure \
    --datarootdir=%{_datarootdir} \
    --with-buildtag="%{__buildtag}" \
    --with-localdatadir="%{__localdatadir}" \
    --disable-static

%begin build

%{__make} %{_smp_mflags}

%begin install

%{__make} install DESTDIR=$__installdir

%{__mkdir_p} $__installdir%{_sysconfdir}/pkgbuild/macros

%{__cat} > $__installdir%{_sysconfdir}/pkgbuild/pkgbuild.pkgspec << EOF
# PkgBuild global configuration file
#
# Add macros here to customize the pkgbuild behavior.
EOF

%{__cat} > $__installdir%{_sysconfdir}/pkgbuild/setup.pkgspec << EOF
# PkgBuild global setup file
#
# Add macros here to customize the pkgbuild behavior.
EOF

%{__mkdir_p} $__installdir%{__localdatadir}/distfiles

%{__chmod} -R 1777 $__installdir%{__localdatadir}/distfiles


%files
%doc AUTHORS COPYING ChangeLog NEWS README
%dir %{_sysconfdir}/pkgbuild
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/pkgbuild/*.pkgspec
%dir %{_sysconfdir}/pkgbuild/macros
%{_bindir}/pkgbuild
%dir %{_datadir}/pkgbuild
%{_datadir}/pkgbuild/*
%dir %{_localstatedir}/pkgbuild/distfiles


%changelog
* Thursday 27 July 2009 Darth Vader <darth.vader@galacticempire.com> -
- Initial build.

kikinovak · 06-09-2015, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth Vader

Don't worry, in Real Life I maintain an entire Linux distribution, true, very similar with Slackware

Any chance you might share this?

ReaperX7 · 06-09-2015, 07:05 AM

The website is down and distrowatch claims it's defunct...

Last release was 2008.1 over 7 years ago for i586 platform.

lems · 06-09-2015, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianL

Everybody can have the same ideas, think the same thoughts.

This is not true, intelligence is normally distributed (via Gauss' bell curve), just like height, beauty or income. Some thoughts can only be thought by geniuses, or very smart people -- i.e. those who won the genetic lottery, and those are rare (gifted people with an IQ of at least 130 make up about 2 percent of the population). The Unabobomber's dissertation, for example, could only be understood by a handful of mathematicians around the world.

kikinovak · 06-09-2015, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lems

This is not true, intelligence is normally distributed (via Gauss' bell curve), just like height, beauty or income. Some thoughts can only be thought by geniuses, or very smart people -- i.e. those who won the genetic lottery, and those are rare (gifted people with an IQ of at least 130 make up about 2 percent of the population). The Unabobomber's dissertation, for example, could only be understood by a handful of mathematicians around the world.

In my third year at the University, I had a linguistics professor who was such a genius that even he himself didn't understand a word of what he was saying.

Didier Spaier · 06-09-2015, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReaperX7

The website is down and distrowatch claims it's defunct...

Last release was 2008.1 over 7 years ago for i586 platform.

Still, DARKSTAR itself survives, but much changed, as an in-house server solution (at least that was true nearly one year ago). What Dark Vader meant, I guess, is that he could share some of the tools he still uses in this context.

@Dark Vader: you and your colleagues are still welcome to contribute to the Romanian translation of Slint that is stalled

brianL · 06-09-2015, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lems

This is not true, intelligence is normally distributed (via Gauss' bell curve), just like height, beauty or income. Some thoughts can only be thought by geniuses, or very smart people -- i.e. those who won the genetic lottery, and those are rare (gifted people with an IQ of at least 130 make up about 2 percent of the population). The Unabobomber's dissertation, for example, could only be understood by a handful of mathematicians around the world.

Yeah, you're right. I was generalizing, a mistake made regularly by us 98%ers.

Didier Spaier · 06-09-2015, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lems

gifted people with an IQ of at least 130 make up about 2 percent of the population

IQ is a metric based on success on some tests by a given child aged X, compared with the age Y from which most children succeed in the same tests. As such it is a measure of precocity, not of intelligence and has absolutely no meaning for adults.

But this reminds me this quote attributed to B.F. Skinner. Asked "But what is intelligence, by the way?" he answered "Intelligence is what my test measure". Unfortunately some people thought he spoke seriously. More here. I agree with most.

lems · 06-09-2015, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianL

Yeah, you're right. I was generalizing, a mistake made regularly by us 98%ers.

Never claimed I was part of the 2 percent. Just pointed out that some ideas require an intelligence level that not everyone can claim for themselves. I, for example, have absolutely no problems with being just average, and I see no reason to deny the importance and validity of IQ.