SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
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.
I dual-booted Slamd64 and BlueWhite64 for a while to see which unofficial 64 bit Slackware I liked better. Both are great, but I ended up choosing BW64. Arny seems to be a bit faster at keeping up with the latest Slackware.
It doesn't really bother me that Arny used Slamd64's multi-lib toolchain to create BlueWhite64.
There are way too many threads that go offtopic whenever there is mention of 64-bit Slackware, indeed tomorrow, I'll gather a bit more evidence and then make the new post, maybe it will end this nonsense.
There are way too many threads that go offtopic whenever there is mention of 64-bit Slackware, indeed tomorrow, I'll gather a bit more evidence and then make the new post, maybe it will end this nonsense.
Create that new thread now, and if you lack the time at the moment, add the evidence you want to add tomorrow. This thread is veering off into the wrong direction already, wait a few hours and there will be a lot of unnecessary extra posts added.
'H' I agree with Alien_Bob. As I stated earlier start a new post thread on the Slackware forum and go from there. I suspect arny will just dance to the same old song as he did in post 15 of this thread.
This project was started in May 2006 and was built from Slackware -current sources using the existing 64-bit multilib toolchain from the Slamd64 Linux (thanks Fred!) to create a new 64-bit non-multilib toolchain in order to build the rest of the programs. The Bluewhite64 project goal is to imitate the same user experience of the Intel distribution as closely as possible and includes all of the same software, configuration scripts plus
the needed 64-bit patches.
The GPL says that I can copy, modify and release the modified programs, so everything is legal. If you use the term "plagiarism" then all distro derivatives should be accused by this. Ubuntu, Fedora, all other derivatives. This is Open Source, you can copy, modify and distribute the modified work. Also, all forks can be accused, so, whats wrong here?
Maybe you don't know but at x86_64 distros can be multi lib and non-multi lib, as the Linux From Scratch it is: http://cross-lfs.org/view/svn/. Since the multi lib was already made why should I made another one? So, i made a non-multi lib (multi lib != non-multi lib - see it is a difference here!). As I noticed at the beginning I used Slamd64 to compile a new non-multi lib tool chain and the rest of the programs. Whats wrong here?
I use the term 'plagiarism' as it relates to you arny not other distributions or authors of GNU/Linux. You have the tendency to utilize other peoples work without acknowledgment to the original author. The GNU/GPL doesn't give cause to utilize others work and pass it as your own. You apparently don't understand the meaning of the word plagiarism;
Quote:
plagiarism [play‐jă‐rizm], the theft of ideas (such as the plots of narrative or dramatic works) or of written passages or works, where these are passed off as one's own work without acknowledgement of their true origin; or a piece of writing thus stolen. Plagiarism is not always easily separable from imitation, adaptation, or pastiche, but is usually distinguished by its dishonest intention. A person practising this form of literary theft is a plagiarist. The older term plagiary was applied both to plagiarisms and to plagiarists.
I don't need a lesson on libs from you. Thanks but no thanks!
Hi,
I use the term 'plagiarism' as it relates to you arny not other distributions or authors of GNU/Linux. You have the tendency to utilize other peoples work without acknowledgment to the original author. The GNU/GPL doesn't give cause to utilize others work and pass it as your own. You apparently don't understand the meaning of the word plagiarism;
Please, can you be more specific? Where I told that "utilize others work and pass it as your own"? If you refer to the tuxmachines interview then you and other are wrongly understanded. From there started all this. I'm I right? Sorry that I forgot to mention that I used Slamd64 toolchain to create Bluewhite64, but I put that Info at my web page later. So, why are still continue to argue on this subject? You will make Slackware better? No, I just appreciate that you and others are making free publicity to Bluewhite64 Linux, and I Thank You! .
I just appreciate that you and others are making free publicity to Bluewhite64 Linux, and I Thank You! .
Nothing a google search for "64 bit slackware" wouldn't come up with in the first 5 links... Oddly enough though, "Slamd64" comes up at the top being that it is only slackware based and multilib (which breaks the requirements on slackware's porting page) But then, google has a page ranking system that tracks the number of pages that link to other pages.
Nothing a google search for "64 bit slackware" wouldn't come up with in the first 5 links... Oddly enough though, "Slamd64" comes up at the top being that it is only slackware based and multilib (which breaks the requirements on slackware's porting page) But then, google has a page ranking system that tracks the number of pages that link to other pages.
Thanks to onebuck and that link at Slackware-Links, thats why Google result put Slamd64 in the top.
@onebuck: Don't forget that you are associate a trademark with a project that are not recognized as official! So, if you are don't trust me, ask Pat and you will see that I am right.
Thanks to onebuck and that link at Slackware-Links, thats why Google result put Slamd64 in the top.
@onebuck: Don't forget that you are associate a trademark with a project that are not recognized as official! So, if you are don't trust me, ask Pat and you will see that I am right.
arny, maybe they have a problem with trademark association where you come from but here in the USA we can speak or write with the association without violation. No where in the tag on 'Slackware-Links' is there a violation.
I think you are angered because I will not post or link BW64 on 'Slackware-Links'. As I stated 'If you will correct openly the mistakes made with BW64 as they are associated with Slamd64 then I'll post the link'.
64-bit Slackware® <- 'Slamd64 is an unofficial port of Slackware® Linux to the x86_64 architecture.'
arny, as for asking PV about anything related to this subject would not necessarily solve the issue. I am a free thinker and don't need a second person or parties to make my decisions.
Thanks for the acknowledgment for the Slamd64 ranking but I think a lot of people do recognize Slamd64.
I think you are angered because I will not post or link BW64 on 'Slackware-Links'. As I stated 'If you will correct openly the mistakes made with BW64 as they are associated with Slamd64 then I'll post the link'.
I'm not angered, but you are not fair in this situation. You don't permit to others to choose which version of the unofficial port to use/test. You have a monopol there, how can be this called? Antitrust? So, what are you do at that links is a trademark violation. Slamd64 looks like Slackware? ( http://slackware.com/trademark/trademark.php) No, so Slackware64 it is a Trademark of Slackware Linux. Inc. not Slamd64's.
I'm not angered, but you are not fair in this situation. You don't permit to others to choose which version of the unofficial port to use/test. You have a monopol there, how can be this called? Antitrust? So, what are you do at that links is a trademark violation. Slamd64 looks like Slackware? ( http://slackware.com/trademark/trademark.php) No, so Slackware64 it is a Trademark of Slackware Linux. Inc. not Slamd64's.
What mistakes?
Just like you to take things out of context and reword them to suit your position;
64-bit Slackware® <- 'Slamd64 is an unofficial port of Slackware® Linux to the x86_64 architecture.'
Please point to me where the "No, so Slackware64 it is a Trademark of Slackware Linux. Inc. not Slamd64's." violation is for the link in the above quote for the 'Slackware-Links'.
You are stating that the heading is in violation "Slackware® 64:'? Please note the '® - Trademark' for Slackware®! The '64' is not include within the trademark.
The standard version of Bluewhite64 is a complex, open source Linux distribution that runs on single and multicore AMD64 Sempron, Athlon, Opteron, Turion, Phenom, and Intel EM64T servers and workstations. It strictly follows Slackware's development line, offering the same user experience as Slackware does on the 32-bit Intel architecture.
This project was started in May 2006 and was built from Slackware -current sources using the existing 64-bit multilib toolchain from the Slamd64 Linux (thanks Fred!) to create a new 64-bit non-multilib toolchain in order to build the rest of the programs. The Bluewhite64 project goal is to imitate the same user experience of the Intel distribution as closely as possible and includes all of the same software, configuration scripts plus the needed 64-bit patches.
Apart from the standard edition, I've also created three live versions, namely LiveDVD, LiveUSB, and miniLive. These versions have their base root in the standard edition and offer extra packages created by the Bluewhite64 community and me. The purpose of these live versions is to serve as a preview to those who wish to try the standard edition but don't want to install it yet, as well as providing some new features.
Bluewhite64 Linux LiveDVD, LiveUSB, and miniLive are targeted toward beginners. A new distribution tends to make people skeptical, so I wanted to give them a chance to test Bluewhite64 without installing it by using a bootable media. They include Bluewhite64 standard edition plus some extra packages.
The standard, LiveDVD, and miniLive editions can be downloaded free of charge. Bluewhite64 Linux Flash was specially crafted for an USB flash drive, and its purpose is to financially sustain the project. It includes some new features in comparison with the LiveDVD, the most important being the ability to save changes. You can use it as a mobile operating system without losing the files you created after a reboot. Bluewhite64 Linux Flash is available from the Romanian online store in three versions -- 8GB, 16GB, 32GB and 64GB -- that cost €39, €49, €79 and €169 respectively. The USB sticks are branded Kingston and Corsair and I test them before delivery.
The miniLive version was born because some users wanted a smaller Live edition and to satisfy my own curiosity. I wanted to see how much I could strip down a 64-bit operating system while providing a minimum of software packages. 64-bit packages are somewhat larger than the 32-bit versions of the same software.
I'd like to Thanks to Patrick J. Volkerding, Robby Workman, Eric Hameleers, Piter Punk for their work on the Slackware Linux. Also, thanks to all others who send reports, patches, suggestions, fixes to the Slackware team. Thank You All!
If the USA Trademark and Copyright followed your rules or ways of interpretation then you are in direct violation by the wording in the above quote. Your acknowledgments here or at your info page don't exempt you from correcting your violations within the BW64 distribution for Trademark, copyright or even GNU/GPL.
I do not have a monopoly as you suggest. I told you that I would post your BW64 link(s) when you correct the errors. Your errors are to broad to list and I'm not going to do your work for the parasitic fork of Slackware® that you call BW64.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
.
