From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KCXMi-0008VH-8N for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:09:08 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 04A31E0442; Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:09:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (mailgw1.fraunhofer.de [153.96.1.17]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2175E0442 for ; Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:09:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de[host mailgw23] (8.14.2+/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m5SA94Wt024294 for ; Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:09:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.14.2+/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m5SA94ct024270 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:09:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id m5SA6JaY023026 for ; Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:06:19 +0200 (MEST) Received: from rigel ([10.147.65.195]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:06:19 +0200 Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:06:19 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's Message-ID: <48660d1b.B9v5pIdQ81gN10qj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> References: <4864059A.7070602@paradise.net.nz> <486408e8.H6jJprFk5Zz6c8f9%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200806271100.15762.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <4864b227.lYMApV4Tx50fgp98%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <28FC20CF-A74D-4C91-8F0C-9CEA66599471@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> <4864b997.wuGCZVlMdDQKTIxH%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20080627215052.381fe4ed@ilievnet.com> <486567c2.PzqXKZJYaHOvK7F7%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20080628044126.3f44efe2@ilievnet.com> In-Reply-To: <20080628044126.3f44efe2@ilievnet.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jun 2008 10:06:19.0389 (UTC) FILETIME=[9C363AD0:01C8D906] X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 47dfc7f0-1425-4cae-bcb6-de912d2bbc71 X-Archives-Hash: c28fdf7948b054026ee2f2520f2e6c2b Daniel Iliev wrote: > > The URLs mentioned did point to disinformation from lwn.net that > > should be easily identifyable as incorrect claims. If such URLs are > > published without comment, I asume that the questionair believes the > > incorrect claims from lwn.net. Would you answer people if they make > > untrue claims (e.g. by giving uncommented pointers to other peoples > > incorrect articles) before asking? > >=20 > > No, this is your assumption. Mine is the opposite - as I see it, the > question is very real and the author admitted that he found those URLs > using Google which implies he had nothing to do them. Could you explain me why he did not read the information on the cdrtools web page to get the information? > > What do you call "a modified CDDL license" and why do you believe > > there is "a modified CDDL license"? > > > Answering the question with question? (obviously I can do that too :D) It makes no sense to answer questions if the question contains a hint for= a=20 missunderstanding. > Seriously, "eix -v cdrtools" gives "GPL-2 LGPL-2.1 CDDL-Schily". I > assumed you want the package released under your own licence based on > the Sun's CDDL. If you read the CDDL, you should understand the background. Meanwhile it = makes sense to tell the person who is responsible for the missleadingly shorten= ed information to correct it. BTW: If you like to understand it completely compare the 1st CDDL proposa= l with=20 the final text. I am responsible for the changes and these changes allow = authors like me to use the CDDL. Before it was only usable in the USA and only by= Sun. > > Do you know the history? Do you know that since summer 2004, some > > people (those people who now stand behind "wodim") started to attack > > the cdrtools project? > > > No, I've never heard about the problem before I saw your posts to this > list several months ago, but I really care to see your side of the > story. Why don't you then frist read the information on the cdrtools web page? > First it would be interesting, second more effective for your cause and > third it would hopefully cease your current practice to hijack every > optical media related thread on this list and send spam that advertises > your product (cdrtools). If you believe this, then we need to stop this thread immediately. Every such thread on this list that was based on Bugs introduced by the p= eople=20 who "created" wodim. =20 > I mean no offense, but allow me to be blunt. This practice of yours > is not only extremely annoying, but it is also very unwise because it > backfires - instead of making people understand your problem, now you > have a list of annoyed Gentoo fans. Do you like to tell me that Gentoo users are not interested to know why t= hey have problems with CD/DVD writing? Do you like to tell me that nobody is interested in a simple fix? > You want to use the CDDL. On the other hand you can't release the whole > project under CDDL, because there are parts written by other people who > had released their work under GPL before you took the project. So, you > dual-licensed the package, releasing the parts you have written by > yourself as CDDL and the others w/o changing the license. > > (How am I doing so far?) It seems that you never tried to read the information on the cdrtools web page. > Some Debian maintainers saw a problem because CDDL is not compatible > with GNU GPL and they made the fork "cdrkit". As I understand it the > legal problem is when it comes to the binaries produced from your > sources because their distribution will violate the GNU GPL. > > That's why most of the binary distros dropped your packet. On the other > hand Gentoo and the other source based distros don't have the same > problem, because they don't distribute binaries. This is the lies spread by the people around Eduard Bloch. The truth is that if these people _really_ believe their claim, they woul= d=20 need to take cdrkit offline immediately because it includes even more of = the same "violations" claimed by Bloch & Co against the original project. Let me give you a simple example: they claim that a GPLd source may only = be=20 compiled using GPLd build system and that the build system needs to be pa= rt of=20 the source. Well, the second claim is correct, but they do not include th= e build system used for cdrkit in the cdrkit source. They even replaced the original build system by just another build system= that=20 is not under GPL too. The people around Bloch are contradicting themselves and nobody seems to = care=20 about the truth. J=F6rg --=20 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J=F6rg Schilling D-13353 = Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) =20 schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogs= pot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/s= chily --=20 gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list