OESF Portal | OESF Forum | OESF Wiki | LinuxPDA | #planetgemini chat on matrix.org | #gemini-pda chat on Freenode | #zaurus and #alarmz chat on Freenode | ELSI (coming soon) | Ibiblio


Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> guylhem rom & possible GPL issues?
post May 15 2005, 09:04 AM
Post #1

Group: Members
Posts: 577
Joined: 17-March 04
Member No.: 2,365

QUOTE(CoreDump @ May 15 2005, 06:14 AM)
Anyway I'm open. Please tell me how you think the development should go, and if you like the roadmap. As adf said, I'm not quite satisfied by opie/oe/oz. I've to publish an editorial (soon - really :-) on my thoughts, but basically 1) braking binary compatibility is bad

Actually, in this case it is good. Good as in a 100-300% floating point performance increase and overall faster application launch times. Anyone who has used a Sharp ROM who now uses an OZ ROM knows what I'm talking about.

That's right. It's much better. But at the same time, you are using a different sync method, not providing libsl equivalents etc. etc. so compatibility is broken at multiple levels. That's sharp fault for imposing libsl and other oddities, but there should be an intelligent workaround.

I mean, using softfloat is not the problem by itself - softfloat is good ! Mostly for the binaries which can take advantage of it, say mplayer. In fact, they could use LD_PRELOAD while the rest of the system would stay in hardfloat until a good solution is found (zync was very promising) to be 100% sharp compatible where it matters.

QUOTE(CoreDump @ May 15 2005, 06:14 AM)
2) shipping unfinished/untested distributions is worse

The current OZ branch is labled "unstable" for a reason.

Then don't ship it and don't announce it. Or ship it without GUI (I did that :-) - it prevents end users from giving it a try when they shouldn't. If you don't do any of that, people will install it and complain.

QUOTE(CoreDump @ May 15 2005, 06:14 AM)
3) imposing developpers/contributors to use the entire buildsystem weighting several Gb is like telling them "please don't contribute".

If you can't spare a lousy 3-5GB w/ todays HDDs prices you are indeed out of luck. But that is hardly the fault of OE or OZ.

I can't. And it's OE fault, unless there's a misterious "bitbake offer me a new HD" option I don't know. Go to externe.net/zaurus/sdk. You'll have the 2.95 toolchain and 1.5 qtopia in less than 200 Megs- so you can do differently.

Just give me the same for OE ! All I'm asking in the 3.4 toolchain and the /opt/Opie. I don't want everything else. Hell - just give me the 3.4 toolchain for x86 in a tarball and I'll be happy :-)

I've been asking that for weeks. I don't want the crosstools script version, I want your version. Why is it nowhere on the website to download? Why could nobody offer me a tarball? I really don't have 2 Gb. In fact I have 155 Mb free at the moment on my 40 Gb disk. And I won't purchase additional space - because I don't need it, except if I want to play with OE.

Don't get me wrong. OE is impressive, and you are doing great things. But I think it could be even better if little modifications were done - the ones suggested above, and (flame flame) dropping opie and moving to qtopia 2.1 while fixing/porting apps to use it!

You know the motto : destroying is the easiest, creating is harder, maintaining/fixing is the most complicated. The hard work is on making something compatible while fixing issues at the same time.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Start new topic
post May 15 2005, 11:02 AM
Post #2

Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 15-May 05
Member No.: 7,142

1.)I don't care what you're doing but you should clarify one thing. What you do is not about Free Software. You're not interested in your personal Freedom and will die in slavery. Russell King would tell you to better use the other Windows based Embedded Operating System, but as I don't care I don't mind....

2.) Your SDK is illegal. You distribute GPL/LGPL binaries. Either remove it or get into conformance with the Software included. See http://www.gpl-violations.org/
To get into conformance with the licenses publish the source in the same place and the build tools you used to create your binaries and distribution.

3.) Tearing apart original copyrighted applications and redistribution the result is illegal, you do not respect the intellectual property of thirds. I get the bitter test of being surrounded with script kiddies, having their own winftp based warez server. Please tell me I'm wrong and show your written copy of Sharp, Opera any other provider that you're allowed to redistribute their property

4.) I'm looking forward for your maintaining efforts, providing security fixes and similar...

I leave 5.) to n.) for future comments and I hope you find your way into Freedom, forcing slavery onto other users is not an option.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post May 17 2005, 09:42 AM
Post #3

Group: Members
Posts: 690
Joined: 4-June 04
From: Ohio
Member No.: 3,570

He probably works for Micro$oft. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Jul 6 2005, 12:11 PM
Post #4

Group: Members
Posts: 296
Joined: 27-October 03
From: Greenfield, NH
Member No.: 781

QUOTE(BarryW @ May 17 2005, 05:42 PM)
He probably works for Micro$oft.  :)

- Outta my head! (giggle)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th May 2018 - 04:16 AM