Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 09:07:17 -0800 From: "IT3 Stuart Blake Tener, USNR-R" <stuart@bh90210.net> Message-id: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAA6nohIbvp0RGXqACAx8VP1sKAAAAQAAAAS0b7d10lHEaeItHY9JECIwEAAAAA@bh90210.net> Subject: RE: [suse-sparc] Will there be a SuSE 8.0 for Sparc?
Mr. Yashinski:
I have in fact purchased Intel versions of Linux on many
occasions, it is not as though I have never supported RedHat, SuSE or
anyone else. So what you arer implying is unfair and untrue. I was
simply pointing out that RedHat is trying to do what it can in answering
questions and listening to people even if they have not paid officially
for the particular product they are using.
I was also simply referring to SuSE's refusal to either put
their I386 ISOs on the web, or allow others to do so. I was told by one
US Linux seller that they asked SuSE about putting the ISOs on the web,
SuSE gave them a very "chilled" response to doing so, and mentioned YAST
and the intermingling of copyrighted RPMs as their excuse as to why.
This in my view is not in pursuit of the spirit that the GPL, and is
(putting a copyrighted YAST into the distribution) as I believe a
"workaround" for allowing I386 SuSE to be placed on the web in ISO form.
If it was simply a matter of having commercial files on the ISO (other
than YAST) that SuSE was concerned about they could make a distro of ISO
without those files, and put it on the web, or publicize the fact that
they have no problem with others doing same, they do not, they do not
want I386 ISOs out on the web, and that is in my view against the
general spirit of the GPL.
I do hope that the SPARC port of Linux (from SuSE) is
successful, but I also am concerned that it will also go the way of
I386, and one day not be freely available on the net, and SuSE will stop
others from doing the same.
When my client was attempting to purchase it from SuSE (the
SPARC port) some several months back, we were told (and we called SuSE
directly on their toll-free hotline) that there was no support for the
SPARC port, and there was no way to pay for it. We called SuSE directly
and would have gladly paid for the copy, just to resolve the happy meal
issue which has been discussed by several people on this list.
There seems to be a problem with Linux crashing, if you have a
fair amount of traffic going over the Happy Meal ehternet port. It also
complains about DMA errors, I have logs which I can send to anyone whom
is interested in investigating the issue further.
Very Respectfully,
Stuart Blake Tener, IT3 (E-4), USNR-R, N3GWG
Beverly Hills, California
VTU 1904G (Volunteer Training Unit)
stuart@bh90210.net
west coast: (310)-358-0202 P.O. Box 16043, Beverly Hills, CA 90209-2043
east coast: (215)-338-6005 P.O. Box 45859, Philadelphia, PA 19149-5859
Telecopier: (419)-715-6073 fax to email gateway via www.efax.com (it's
free!)
JOIN THE US NAVY RESERVE, SERVE YOUR COUNTRY, AND BENEFIT FROM IT ALL.
Sunday, March 10, 2002 9:06 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Yasholomew Yashinski [mailto:yashy@mail.yashy.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 6:56 AM
To: IT3 Stuart Blake Tener, USNR-R
Cc: suse-sparc@suse.com
Subject: RE: [suse-sparc] Will there be a SuSE 8.0 for Sparc?
> Your theorem is completely misplaced. I have joined many RedHat
> lists and gotten responses from RedHat employees and never paid a
dime,
> though they do appreciate my taking the time to inform them of the
> issues with their documentation or code they wrote (something no SuSE
> employee, that I have seen, has ever done here thus far).
>
> Perhaps you ought to read some of the RedHat lists and see how
> they deal with the people helping them beta test their software (which
> is what you are doing buy giving it away, we are not dumb).
I would imagine the lists are rather sparse since there is no support
for
sparc from them anymore. Boasting about never paying a dime shows no
incentive to help this community, and only makes your arguements more
weak
then they already are.
> After all, will SuSE continue to make the Sun version of its
> Linux available for free on its website like this even after it has
> started to sell the product? Or are you going "I386isize" it, and
never
> put the ISOs on your website again. If it does not choose to keep
giving
> SuSE Linux for SPARC away after it starts to sell it, will we all be
> thanked for debugging your code for you?
After following SuSE i386 for many years, I have my fingers crossed
that
the sparc port can be as advanced some day. From what you have wrote
above, this shows you have contributed in no way.
> I am American, and while others in other parts of the world may
> not view the GPL or its intended meaning the way we do here in the US,
> many people [in the US, as juxtaposed against US legislative intent]
see
> the lack of SuSE's willingness to distribute (or allow the
distribution,
> buy clearing placing YAST under the GPL) the I386 version of its Linux
> (ISOs) via the web or ftp, as a very bad faith violation of the GPL if
> not legally, certainly spiritually and morally.
What is your arguement now? That you're American? Your ignorance
towards
the GPL? It's hard to follow your message.
> I must admit, I am not a lawyer, but I do believe that the lack
> of YAST's GPLness, is in fact a violation of the GPL. It is (as I
> understand it) a derivative work. In other words, YAST has no
> functionality if you remove Linux. Therefore, as I understand it YAST
is
> a derivative work, and ought be properly licensed according to the
> stipulations of the GPL as it applies to Linux.
Idem.
> I have posted a bug (not this bug, a different one), and not one
> SuSE employee even acknowledged that they read it (not even personally
> offlist). If you want people to believe that you care about a product
> and making it work, then at minimum you must at least acknowledge you
> are doing more than just reading the list and staying silent, and it
> best to do this in the least arogant manner possible, not in the tone
in
> which your post (included herein below for reference purposes) came
off
> to me.
Where did you post it? bugzilla? People do believe they care about
their
product, you're on your own here. Writing this from a SuSE/Sparc machine
shows to me they care, as I can't imagine it helps their revenue stream
to
much at this stage.
> Not to mention some several weeks ago I had a client whom
> installed SuSE SPARC and was WILLING TO PAY for support, but was
unable
> to do so. So it is just not a matter of "here its free, thank us and
> good luck". It is a matter of what the mix requires. I am a
consultant,
> if I am able to get a distro (for SPARC, Intel or whatever hardware I
> own) for free and have some assistance making it work, then I can
assure
> you (as I have done), I will use it at my consulting engagements and
> make sure my clients pay for it.
Why is SuSE responsible for your clients unability to pay for it? It's
rather easy to purchase, the website has already been posted on this
list.
> There is a fifth bug, a dma error that occurs on the Ethernet
> (happy meal) board when a large amount of network traffic flows on the
> board. I personally tested and experienced this, and no such problem
> exists when the same level of data is pumped using Solaris, thus, it
is
> not a hardware problem.
The above paragraph could be useful, with a little more details.
My thanks also to SuSE for their sparc port. Their time and energy is
appreciated. Hopefully this can financially benefit your company, and
grow as the i386 port does.
Cheers,
-- Yashy-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-sparc-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands, e-mail: suse-sparc-help@suse.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.0 : Sun Mar 10 2002 - 09:06:09 PST