i download slackware 12.1 iso image - Page 3

brianL · 05-16-2008, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Hill

brianL,
If Mickey$oft offered an OS that performed like Slackware, at even a
reasonable cost, I'd be willing to check it out. Do they?

No chance. Never happen. They specialise in stuff that costs more the worse it is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Hill

What does "Behalten Sie es einfach, dumm" translate to in English?
Your "translation.com" site offered nothing at all.

I just fed in: "Keep It Simple, Stupid".

rworkman · 05-16-2008, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Hill

Using Robby's bandwidth is not stealing. He posts links on the
net and offers his stuff for free. If he doesn't want someone
leeching it, he is free to block their IP, netblock, or whatever
it takes.

Indeed. For clarity's sake, I wasn't implying that anyone was stealing - just that they might perhaps be impolite in their actions.

Quote:

There are many ways that easys is taking from Slackware without
paying for the efforts. They could start with asking Pat V. and
the Slackware core team if they agree to easys using what they
have worked very hard on (Slackware) and putting the easys name
on it.

The same thing applies to Slamd64 IMO. They don't even bother
to change the name from Slackware to Slamd64 in files they get
from Slackware. Lazy ...

I'm not sure I follow. Surely you're not suggesting they do something like second comment at http://www.linux.com/feature/132875

Code:

diff -Nur initrd_12.1/usr/lib/setup/setup init_bw/usr/lib/setup/setup
--- initrd_12.1/usr/lib/setup/setup 2008-05-06 16:47:55.000000000 +0400
+++ initrd_bw/usr/lib/setup/setup 2008-05-06 16:44:08.000000000 +0400
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
#!/bin/sh
#
# Copyright 1993,1994,1999 Patrick Volkerding, Moorhead, Minnesota USA
-# Copyright 2001, 2003, 2004 Slackware Linux, Inc., Concord, CA
+# Copyright 2001, 2003, 2004 Bluewhite64 Linux, Inc., Concord, CA
# Copyright 2006, 2007 Patrick Volkerding, Sebeka, Minnesota USA
# All rights reserved.
#

Changing the name in files from Slackware would in many cases be *blatant* copyright infringement.

pixellany · 05-16-2008, 10:08 AM

Quote:

What does "Behalten Sie es einfach, dumm" translate to in English?

In the context, I assumed it was the German translation of K.I.S.S.

Quote:

But basically taking someone else's
hard, and continuing work, and just rebranding it is stealing ... plain and simple.

I don't want to quibble (well, maybe, just a little....

) but--if I am not mistaken--the typical Open-Source license allows you take some code, and make no changes except the name.
This said, I do agree that there are lots of parasites out there--defined in this context as people who take but don't add value. More generally, some feel that the world is being taken over by parasites. Unfortunately, most of them are doing nothing illegal.

Bruce Hill · 05-16-2008, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Does Slamd64 stack up the same?

Looks to me like stealing ... course, I'm just an old country boy.

rworkman · 05-16-2008, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Hill

Does Slamd64 stack up the same?

Looks to me like stealing ... course, I'm just an old country boy.

To my knowledge, Slamd64 doesn't do that, and I'd be sorely disappointed if they did.
Of course, the only reason I know about Bluewhite doing it is that comment though, so...

Bruce Hill · 05-16-2008, 10:20 AM

Did the Bluewhite64 Linux distro start at version 12.0?

Funny how they got there so quick.

Did you also notice how a Romanian copyrighted his stuff
in California?

Slamd64 still uses the Slackware name in it's Slackware files.

I also imagine the Bluewhite64 guy sends some of the profits
from his USB disk sales to Slackware.

rworkman · 05-16-2008, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pixellany

I don't want to quibble (well, maybe, just a little....

) but--if I am not mistaken--the typical Open-Source license allows you take some code, and make no changes except the name.
This said, I do agree that there are lots of parasites out there--defined in this context as people who take but don't add value. More generally, some feel that the world is being taken over by parasites. Unfortunately, most of them are doing nothing illegal.

Indeed, hence my usage of the term "impolite" rather than "illegal."

Bruce Hill · 05-16-2008, 10:40 AM

Just one example of a Slamd64 file from Slackware -> ftp://anorien.warwick.ac.uk/slamd64/...nt/UPGRADE.TXT

He even admits it:

Quote:

This file documents the instructions for upgrading to Slamd64 12.0, the
packages added, removed, renamed, and/or split during the development cycle
from Slamd64 11.0 through Slamd64 12.0, and some potential "gotchas" that
users can avoid by arming themselves with a little knowledge. This file is
a very slightly modified version of the same file in Slackware.

Same file from Slackware-12.0:

Quote:

This file documents the instructions for upgrading to Slackware 12.0, the
packages added, removed, renamed, and/or split during the development cycle
from Slackware 11.0 through Slackware 12.0, and some potential "gotchas" that
users can avoid by arming themselves with a little knowledge.

Heavy emphasis on very slightly modified.

So perhaps Alien Bob is right ... they're just parasites.

rworkman · 05-16-2008, 10:53 AM

Well, when the content is the same, the content is the same. I mean, in that particular case, how could it be redone effectively? I'd be more concerned if the file had *not* mentioned that it was basically copied from Slackware. Using and properly crediting it is fine IMHO, at least in that particular case.

+Alan Hicks+ · 05-16-2008, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Hill

I also imagine the Bluewhite64 guy sends some of the profits
from his USB disk sales to Slackware.

I've got a thousand dollars says he doesn't. Wanna take that bet?

Bruce Hill · 05-16-2008, 11:15 AM

You know I don't gamble.

Nylex · 05-16-2008, 11:18 AM

I'm guessing the OP has deserted this thread..

shadowsnipes · 05-16-2008, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rworkman

Well, when the content is the same, the content is the same. I mean, in that particular case, how could it be redone effectively? I'd be more concerned if the file had *not* mentioned that it was basically copied from Slackware. Using and properly crediting it is fine IMHO, at least in that particular case.

Agreed. I don't have a problem with Slamd64 because it is only intended to be a port of Slackware for 64bit. I'm not aware of any 'features' it adds, and it does credit Slackware.

Stuff like easys, on the other hand, I'd prefer that instead their features simply be an 'addon' to Slackware (like the third party GNOME projects), or that they provide a diff of their sources right on the download page. I suppose they don't do this because they don't want to confuse their potential users. Since part of the feature-set of easys is a unique installer, perhaps it would be too difficult to package it as an addon. No matter, it feels cheap to me, and I hope it does bring most people to the original.

Alien Bob · 05-16-2008, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowsnipes

Stuff like easys, on the other hand, I'd prefer that instead their features simply be an 'addon' to Slackware (like the third party GNOME projects), or that they provide a diff of their sources right on the download page. I suppose they don't do this because they don't want to confuse their potential users. Since part of the feature-set of easys is a unique installer, perhaps it would be too difficult to package it as an addon. No matter, it feels cheap to me, and I hope it does bring most people to the original.

People who wonder why I stressed that these parasi^H^H^H^H^H^Hfork-off distros should make their full sources available to the public, should read this page to get some clarity about what violations of the GPL they are guilty of: http://gpl-violations.org/faq/sourcecode-faq.html

Eric

shadowsnipes · 05-16-2008, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alien Bob

People who wonder why I stressed that these parasi^H^H^H^H^H^Hfork-off distros should make their full sources available to the public, should read this page to get some clarity about what violations of the GPL they are guilty of: http://gpl-violations.org/faq/sourcecode-faq.html

Eric

I wonder if anyone submitted easys to this.