On 10 Jul 2008, at 10:07, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Neil Bothwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:51:28 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Da ich es vorhin vergessen habe zu erwähnen:
This is an English speaking list, if you want to converse in another
language, please take it t
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:07:21 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > This is an English speaking list, if you want to converse in another
> > language, please take it to private mail.
>
> In case you did not read it.
>
> Stroller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked me to use a language
> that is better to
Neil Bothwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:51:28 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> > Da ich es vorhin vergessen habe zu erwähnen:
>
> This is an English speaking list, if you want to converse in another
> language, please take it to private mail.
In case you did not read it
On Wednesday 09 July 2008, Dirk Uys wrote:
> This leads me to the question of whether this kind of conduct is
> accepted on the gentoo-user mailing list. If this is indeed the case
> I would accept that and deal with it in a way that I choose.
Very little is explicitly prohibited around here. Whoe
On Wednesday 09 July 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> If "the schily makefile system" was under GPL, _then_ there was a
> problem because the GPL limits the freedom to use software. As "the
> schily makefile system" is under the more free CDDL that (in contrary
> to the GPL) does not limit the freedo
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Sascha Hlusiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am Dienstag 08 Juli 2008 16:12:43 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
Mike Edenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[lots of stuff I regret]
I apologize to everyone for making this mess go on any longer that it
had to.
--
gentoo-user@lists
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 9:02 AM, Neil Bothwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:51:28 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
>> Da ich es vorhin vergessen habe zu erwähnen:
>
> This is an English speaking list, if you want to converse in another
> language, please take it to private mail
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:51:28 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Da ich es vorhin vergessen habe zu erwähnen:
This is an English speaking list, if you want to converse in another
language, please take it to private mail.
--
Neil Bothwick
I don't know what your problem is, but I'll bet it's hard t
On 9 Jul 2008, at 15:05, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Stroller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You really are not in a position to chastise others' English - your
English usage being quite clumsy at the *best* of times.
Wenn Du glaubst Problmeme mit meinem Englisch zu haben, dann laß
uns einfach
di
Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > - "the bucket contains water"
> >
> > and
> >
> > - "the water contains a bucket"
> >
> Ok in this special case:
>
> The bucket is the instructionsset to build cdrtools, and you put fire
> (CDDL Makefile) and water (GPL Mak
2008/7/9 Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Da mein Englisch hier von einem Engländer kritisiert wurde muß ich wohl in
> Deutsch antworten damit dieser Mensch mich besser versteht...
>
>> > You obviously missread the GPL. See your other mail that
Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Da mein Englisch hier von einem Engländer kritisiert wurde muß ich wohl in
Deutsch antworten damit dieser Mensch mich besser versteht...
> > You obviously missread the GPL. See your other mail that verifies that you
> > did
> > not understand the GP
* Joerg Schilling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [09.07.08 15:47]:
> Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> You would need to reread the GPL until you understand this ;-)
>
OK, Jörg,
your the only person on this fricking planet, who actually understands
the GPL. Nor does the FSF, nor does the
* Joerg Schilling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [09.07.08 15:21]:
> Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You obviously missread the GPL. See your other mail that verifies that you
> did
> not understand the GPL correctly.
>
No, the only thing is that I don't apply to *your* *interpretation*
Stroller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You really are not in a position to chastise others' English - your
> English usage being quite clumsy at the *best* of times.
Wenn Du glaubst Problmeme mit meinem Englisch zu haben, dann laß uns einfach
die Diskusion in Deutsch weiterführen.
Ich befürcht
On 9 Jul 2008, at 14:13, Joerg Schilling wrote:
...
I get the impression that you have problems to understand even very
obvious
parts of the GPL, it seems that you would need to enhance your
english.
You frikkin' clown, Joerg.
On 9 Jul 2008, at 10:56, Joerg Schilling wrote:
...
Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The GPL discriminates between "the work" (which needs to be under GPL)
> > and "the complete source" which is a superset of "the work" and other parts
> > that do not need to be under GPL.
> >
> Nowhere in the whole GPL is stated that "the complet
* Joerg Schilling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [09.07.08 15:14]:
> Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > If you _carefully_ read the GPL (lawyers do it, I did it but Debian
> > > doesn't),
> > > you will find the following important fact:
> > >
> > > The GPL uses the phrase "under the ter
Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Besides the fact that this is completely irrelevent (the GPL does _not_
> > require
> > what they call "the scripts" to be under GPL), you are missinterpreting
> > software and legal definitions!
> >
>
> This is *your* opinion of interpreting
Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you _carefully_ read the GPL (lawyers do it, I did it but Debian
> > doesn't),
> > you will find the following important fact:
> >
> > The GPL uses the phrase "under the terms of this License" in all places
> > except
> > the place where it
* Joerg Schilling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [09.07.08 11:57]:
> Well this is because you did oversee important facts in the GPL as many
> people
> do who claim to have read the GPL.
>
> As I did already explain the legal facts for using the program "the schily
> makefile system" (you should read it
* Joerg Schilling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [09.07.08 11:22]:
> Sascha Hlusiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Am Dienstag 08 Juli 2008 16:12:43 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
> > > Mike Edenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > The cdrtools tarball includes a file called "Makefile" in every
> > > > direc
Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, now I finally got it right:
>
> It is about the "scripts". What other people may call makefiles.
>
> The scripts and files bundled with your cdrtools to control the build
> process are under CDDL.
>
> E.g. RULES/i686-linux-gcc.rul:
You did _not
Sascha Hlusiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Dienstag 08 Juli 2008 16:12:43 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
> > Mike Edenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The cdrtools tarball includes a file called "Makefile" in every
> > > directory. The cdrkit includes a file called "CMakeList.txt" in every
>
* Joerg Schilling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [08.07.08 15:10]:
> Sascha Hlusiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Some hints to you:
>
> If you replace nail A by nail B, it still remains a nail.
>
> If you believe that "the schily makefilesystem" refers to
> "scripts used to control compilatio
Sascha Hlusiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Dienstag 08 Juli 2008 16:12:43 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
> > Mike Edenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The cdrtools tarball includes a file called "Makefile" in every
> > > directory. The cdrkit includes a file called "CMakeList.txt" in every
>
Am Dienstag 08 Juli 2008 16:12:43 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
> Mike Edenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The cdrtools tarball includes a file called "Makefile" in every
> > directory. The cdrkit includes a file called "CMakeList.txt" in every
> > directory. THAT FILE has a copyright and license
Mike Edenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The cdrtools tarball includes a file called "Makefile" in every
> directory. The cdrkit includes a file called "CMakeList.txt" in every
> directory. THAT FILE has a copyright and license terms attached to it,
> just like any other source file.
>
> I
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Well, now that you found this out, does this mean that you finally concur with
me that Bloch & Co. are license trolls?
Not being so emotionally attached to the isse as you are, I'm not going
to resort to name calling. I will say that the issue, in my opinion, is
nowhe
Sascha Hlusiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The next step in understanding why Bloch is a license troll is to
> > understand that _iff_ Bloch/Debian seriuosly believe that "the schily
> > makefilesystem" is part of cdrtools and needs to be published under GPL
> > together with cdrtools, then _of
> > And before you tell me to "look again" or "go read something" or
> > whatever -- I did. I have the cdrkit source tarball right here, and I'm
> > looking at the files in question. I also have a copy of the GPL, which
> > says exactly this: "plus the scripts used to control compilation and
> >
Mike Edenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Firstly, the cdrkit source ships with all of the cmake scripts that are
> needed by cmake to build the project. This is all that is required by
> the GPL.
>
> And before you tell me to "look again" or "go read something" or
> whatever -- I did. I ha
Joerg Schilling wrote:
They claimed that the official build system was not legal but they replaced it
with a build system that definitely is not legal because it is not included in
the source.
You keep saying this, but I just don't see where it's coming from.
Firstly, the cdrkit source ships
33 matches
Mail list logo
