New dcom95 mirror

2005-01-23 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
Hello, as Jeremy Newman wanted mirrors for dcom95, here's a new link http://www003.portalis.it/115/download/dcom95.zip Note that because of the Microsoft licencing conditions, you are licenced to download this file only if you are going to use it with wine. Ivan.

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-09 Thread Scott W Gifford
Jeremy White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > Jer tells me it's deleted now; anyone still pointing to SF > needs to update ASAP. Sorry to jump in late, but maybe the problem could be mitigated somewhat by putting a redirect at the old location which would automatically send users and scripts

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-09 Thread Andreas Mohr
file contains a Microsoft digital signature. > The new url is > http://spazioinwind.libero.it/nonsolomicrosoft/DCom95.Exe > the md5sum is b5b69ccd1691fbc43e87a719c1546dcd OK, replaced. http://lisas.de/~andi/wine_files/DCom95.Exe http://lisas.de/~andi/wine_files/DCom95.Exe.md5 Andreas Mohr

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-04 Thread Jeremy White
Ivan Leo Puoti wrote: Hem, Mike I did ask about this on wine-devel and got no answers. I am *not* the sort of person that would take decisions like that one without discussing it first, but as nobody answered I thought nobody cared, it is not my intent to interfere with anything. I was puzzled by

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-04 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
Do you mean you changed SourceForge, or that the new file you posted is a different installer somehow? I'm confused ... I'm not touching sourceforge Ivan.

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-04 Thread Mike Hearn
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 20:44:44 +0100, Ivan Leo Puoti wrote: > Hello, I replaced the sdk redistributable installer with the actualy > installer, as the licence > allows redistribution of the installer for end users only. It also makes > the installation easier. Do you mean you changed SourceForge,

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-04 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
Hem, Mike I did ask about this on wine-devel and got no answers. I am *not* the sort of person that would take decisions like that one without discussing it first, but as nobody answered I thought nobody cared, it is not my intent to interfere with anything. I just don't think it's nice to violate

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-04 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
Oh well, might be good to do that then... I just provided (in case it's needed) http://lisas.de/~andi/wine_files/dcom95.exe http://lisas.de/~andi/wine_files/dcom95.exe.md5 (a copy of the nonsolomicrosoft/ file) which is on the rhlx01 server, MASSIVE bandwidth... Hello, I replaced th

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-04 Thread Andreas Mohr
Hi, On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 03:21:10PM +0100, Ivan Leo Puoti wrote: > Jeremy, we got this reply from the sourceforge staff, please remove the > file. Oh well, might be good to do that then... I just provided (in case it's needed) http://lisas.de/~andi/wine_files/dcom95.exe http://lis

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-04 Thread Mike Hearn
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 15:21:10 +0100, Ivan Leo Puoti wrote: > Jeremy, we got this reply from the sourceforge staff, please remove the file. Why don't you ask them why they're hosting the core fonts which are not open source licensed then? Actually don't bother, we don't want to cause the font guys h

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-04 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
Jeremy, we got this reply from the sourceforge staff, please remove the file. Message: Logged In: YES user_id=597273 Greetings, Only software licensed under an Open Source license may be hosted on SourceForge.net resources. As such, no, it may not. Thank you, David Burley Second Level Support Techn

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-03 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
So why not ask them for explicit permission, and take it down only if they say no? Request submitted http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1095530&group_id=1&atid=21 Ivan.

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-03 Thread Shachar Shemesh
em for explicit permission, and take it down only if they say no? Also, they are hosting the "corefonts" project, which is 100% files of the same type license as dcom95, so I find it hard to believe they will say no. Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd. http://www.lingnu.com/

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-03 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
IIRC such rules only apply to files released under the download section, not stuff put in the webspace. Go to sf.net and click on TOS at the bottom of the page. Ivan.

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-03 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
Jeremy Newman wrote: No, we need reliable US and international mirrors. Don't remove the file again please. Content located on any SourceForge.net-hosted subdomain which is subject to the sole editorial control of the owner or licensee of such subdomain, shall be subject to the OSI-approved licen

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-03 Thread Scott Ritchie
On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 03:43 +0100, Ivan Leo Puoti wrote: > Jeremy Newman wrote: > > Somebody removed dcom95.exe from sf.net. Was there a reason for that? > There is a very precise reason for that, according to the sf rules you must > provide the source code of all binaries hosted

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-03 Thread Jeremy Newman
ill link to it. > > If you need to link to it it's here > http://spazioinwind.libero.it/nonsolomicrosoft/dcom95.exe > > Ivan. > > -- Jeremy Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CodeWeavers, Inc.

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-03 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
I've re-added the file as a hidden file for the moment. It won't show up in the download list, but we can still link to it. If you need to link to it it's here http://spazioinwind.libero.it/nonsolomicrosoft/dcom95.exe Ivan.

Re: dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-03 Thread Ivan Leo Puoti
Jeremy Newman wrote: Somebody removed dcom95.exe from sf.net. Was there a reason for that? There is a very precise reason for that, according to the sf rules you must provide the source code of all binaries hosted there, and all files must comply to the open source definition. I think that

dcom95.exe removed from sf.net

2005-01-03 Thread Jeremy Newman
Somebody removed dcom95.exe from sf.net. Was there a reason for that? We really need to keep that file mirrored. It's an essential file for many programs to run under wine. I've re-added the file as a hidden file for the moment. It won't show up in the download list, but we can still link to it.

Re: [DCOM95] not installable: "a newer version had been installed"

2004-06-17 Thread Mike Hearn
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:10:38 +0200, Luca Capello wrote: > Sorry, my mistake. And I agree, it should be linked from WineHQ (as I > don't see any other way to fall on your #winehq channel FAQ. Well, you can join #winehq and it's in the topic :)

Re: [DCOM95] not installable: "a newer version had been installed"

2004-06-16 Thread Luca Capello
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello again, on 06/16/04 16:46, Mike Hearn wrote: > On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 16:21:22 +0200, Luca Capello wrote: >> This does the trick for both DCOM95 and DCOM98 (as in the reported >> logs). First, I got a message to

Re: [DCOM95] not installable: "a newer version had been installed"

2004-06-16 Thread Mike Hearn
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 16:21:22 +0200, Luca Capello wrote: > This does the trick for both DCOM95 and DCOM98 (as in the reported > logs). First, I got a message to debug a problem > = > fixme:seh:EXC_RtlRaiseException call to unimplemented function > shell32.dll.SHGetSpecialFol

Re: [DCOM95] not installable: "a newer version had been installed"

2004-06-16 Thread Luca Capello
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Mike, on 06/16/04 14:57, Mike Hearn wrote: > On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:09:29 +0200, Luca Capello wrote: >> This is the first test of two: 'Adobe Illustrator 10' doesn't install >> because a problem with the DCOM95 pa

Re: [DCOM95] not installable: "a newer version had been installed"

2004-06-16 Thread Saulius Krasuckas
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004, Mike Hearn wrote: > On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:09:29 +0200, Luca Capello wrote: > > "A newer version of DCOM95 or DCOM98 had been installed. To override, > > you must uninstall the current version first." > > You have to run it like this:

Re: [DCOM95] not installable: "a newer version had been installed"

2004-06-16 Thread Mike Hearn
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:09:29 +0200, Luca Capello wrote: > This is the first test of two: 'Adobe Illustrator 10' doesn't install > because a problem with the DCOM95 package Yes, the InstallShield/DCOM problems are well known. Me and Rob have started looking at this in the las

[DCOM95] not installable: "a newer version had been installed"

2004-06-16 Thread Luca Capello
obe Illustrator 10' doesn't install because a problem with the DCOM95 package The steps: - - get and uncompress 'Wine-20040615' - - ./configure && make depend && make - - su root - - make install - - CTRL-D - - then the following = [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/cvs/

dcom95

2004-04-19 Thread Ivan Leo Murray-Smith
We currently have dcom95 on the sf download page. This is a violation of the sf TOS, and a waste of bandwidth for sf. I propose we link the microsoft download page, instead of having the download on a page that should host only open source. Any objections? Ivan.