Post by thread:You want a newsgroup? Start your own!

Bob Blick wrote: > > But count me out. > > This thread comes up regularly. It's actually been a while... > You are welcome to start any newsgroup you like. > > Please don't screw up the piclist. > > Get a free mail account if you don't like the volume of mail. Get 'em Bob! Here's the rest of this thread : * A newsgroup is the answer! * No - let's keep it the way it is! * No - I have a 300 baud modem, and want a newsgroup! * Then download less Pamela jpg's! * Let's vote! * Yes! * No! * Yes! * No! * Pink! * UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST * Blue! * Maybe you have to change your mailer. Mine can make coffee. * I've used Netscape for years, and it is best. * But they can't make a good navigator! * You shouldn't use Windows in the first place. You call it an OS? * No - but it is better than the Linux wankers and wannabees! * UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST * Let's split up the list! * No - let's just use markings like [OT-humour], [OT-Win vs Linux], [OT-dirty pi ctures] * I don't know how to set up my mailer to filter it. * It's because you use Pegasus. * PICs are too expensive! (hehehehe) * UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST * How do I unsubscribe? * Virus warning! Don't read anything with "Penpals Wanted!" * Everbody shut up, or I'll unsubscribe you all! Geez, I need some sleep! . . . . * <HTML CRAP>!!UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST!!!</HTML CRAP> -- Friendly Regards /"\ \ / Tjaart van der Walt X ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN spam_OUTtjaartTakeThisOuTwasp.co.za / \ AGAINST HTML MAIL |--------------------------------------------------| | Cellpoint Systems SA http://www.cellpt.com | |--------------------------------------------------| | http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html | | WGS84 : -26.0124 +28.1129 | | Voice : +27 (0)11 2545100 | |--------------------------------------------------|

{Quote hidden}>Here's the rest of this thread : >* A newsgroup is the answer! >* No - let's keep it the way it is! >* No - I have a 300 baud modem, and want a newsgroup! >* Then download less Pamela jpg's! >* Let's vote! >* Yes! >* No! >* Yes! >* No! >* Pink! >* UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST >* Blue! >* Maybe you have to change your mailer. Mine can make coffee. >* I've used Netscape for years, and it is best. >* But they can't make a good navigator! >* You shouldn't use Windows in the first place. You call it an OS? >* No - but it is better than the Linux wankers and wannabees! >* UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST >* Let's split up the list! >* No - let's just use markings like [OT-humour], [OT-Win vs Linux], [OT-dirty pictures] {Quote hidden}>* I don't know how to set up my mailer to filter it. >* It's because you use Pegasus. >* PICs are too expensive! (hehehehe) >* UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST >* How do I unsubscribe? >* Virus warning! Don't read anything with "Penpals Wanted!" >* Everbody shut up, or I'll unsubscribe you all! Geez, I need some sleep! >. >. >. >. >* <HTML CRAP>!!UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST!!!</HTML CRAP> > lmao :) you forgot. I'm a newbie, and can't make my led blink. Jc.

On Thu, Jun 10, 1999 at 10:55:26AM -0500, John A. Craft wrote: > > lmao :) > > you forgot. > > I'm a newbie, and can't make my led blink. Also, * I'm new to PICs, what d'y'all think about Zilog? * How do I remove code protection from my PIC? * I just ordered from ITU... (hopefully less frequent now that it's all baby pictures [?]) * Atmel ROX! BTW, how does one set the Dirty Pictures option for PICLIST? I never get any. --Bob PS: FWIW, I think a newsgroup is a Bad Idea. -- ============================================================ Bob Drzyzgula It's not a problem .....bobKILLspam@spam@drzyzgula.org until something bad happens ============================================================

In a message dated 6/10/99 9:26:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, picKILLspamdrzyzgula.org writes: > BTW, how does one set the Dirty Pictures option for > PICLIST? I never get any. > > --Bob > > PS: FWIW, I think a newsgroup is a Bad Idea. > You never get nude PICs (no pun intended)? 'F84 looks real good in black. Not that I have any say in this whole discussion. But I agree with Bob Drzyzgula, havin a newsgroup would open up a can of worms for WOT stuff. Atleast with the PICLIST, you have to sign up, but with a newsgroup, you just post and go. My 1.997 cents, Tim H.

From: Bob Blick <.....bobKILLspam.....TED.NET> To: <EraseMEPICLISTspam_OUTTakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU> Sent: 10 June 1999 16:24 Subject: You want a newsgroup? Start your own! rude, rude, rude!! > This thread comes up regularly. doesn't that tell you something? > You are welcome to start any newsgroup you like. true > Please don't screw up the piclist. duhh Bob - look at the last 3 months worth of messages.. > Get a free mail account if you don't like the volume of mail. there's no such thing as a free lunch.

On Thu, 10 Jun 1999, Jim Main wrote: > rude, rude, rude!! I meant it to carry the strength of my feeling, not be rude. > > This thread comes up regularly. > doesn't that tell you something? So does UNSUBSCRIBE PICLIST, I don't think it tells me anything except that the person writing it is too new to the piclist to have seen previous messages on the same subject. I'm not suggesting you are that person. > > Please don't screw up the piclist. > duhh Bob - look at the last 3 months worth of messages.. I've got a few years of the piclist on CD, what's the point you are trying to make - I was saying I like the piclist. > > Get a free mail account if you don't like the volume of mail. > there's no such thing as a free lunch. I hear you, brother. Check out: http://bobblick.com/bob/tanstafl.html Friendly regards, Bob

FWIW, I agree. I love the PICLIST just the way it is. Occasional wildly comical posts included. Eric On Thursday, June 10, 1999 2:44 PM, Tim Hamel [SMTP:IMDNICE12spam_OUTAOL.COM] wrote: {Quote hidden}> In a message dated 6/10/99 9:26:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > @spam@picKILLspamdrzyzgula.org writes: > > > BTW, how does one set the Dirty Pictures option for > > PICLIST? I never get any. > > > > --Bob > > > > PS: FWIW, I think a newsgroup is a Bad Idea. > > > You never get nude PICs (no pun intended)? 'F84 looks real good in black. > > Not that I have any say in this whole discussion. But I agree with Bob > Drzyzgula, havin a newsgroup would open up a can of worms for WOT stuff. > Atleast with the PICLIST, you have to sign up, but with a newsgroup, you just > post and go. > > My 1.997 cents, > > Tim H.

It must have been a bad day. I laughed so hard I cried. I'm filing this for occa sional amusement. Eric On Thursday, June 10, 1999 10:49 AM, Tjaart van der Walt [SMTP:KILLspamtjaartKILLspamWASP.CO.ZA ] wrote: {Quote hidden}> Bob Blick wrote: > > > > But count me out. > > > > This thread comes up regularly. > It's actually been a while... > > > You are welcome to start any newsgroup you like. > > > > Please don't screw up the piclist. > > > > Get a free mail account if you don't like the volume of mail. > Get 'em Bob! > > Here's the rest of this thread : > * A newsgroup is the answer! > * No - let's keep it the way it is! > * No - I have a 300 baud modem, and want a newsgroup! > * Then download less Pamela jpg's! > * Let's vote! > * Yes! > * No! > * Yes! > * No! > * Pink! > * UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST > * Blue! > * Maybe you have to change your mailer. Mine can make coffee. > * I've used Netscape for years, and it is best. > * But they can't make a good navigator! > * You shouldn't use Windows in the first place. You call it an OS? > * No - but it is better than the Linux wankers and wannabees! > * UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST > * Let's split up the list! > * No - let's just use markings like [OT-humour], [OT-Win vs Linux], [OT-dirty pictures] {Quote hidden}> * I don't know how to set up my mailer to filter it. > * It's because you use Pegasus. > * PICs are too expensive! (hehehehe) > * UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST > * How do I unsubscribe? > * Virus warning! Don't read anything with "Penpals Wanted!" > * Everbody shut up, or I'll unsubscribe you all! Geez, I need some sleep! > . > . > . > . > * <HTML CRAP>!!UNSUBSCRIBBLE PUKELIST!!!</HTML CRAP > > > -- > Friendly Regards /"\ > \ / > Tjaart van der Walt X ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN > RemoveMEtjaartTakeThisOuTwasp.co.za / \ AGAINST HTML MAIL > |--------------------------------------------------| > | Cellpoint Systems SA http://www.cellpt.com | > |--------------------------------------------------| > | http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html | > | WGS84 : -26.0124 +28.1129 | > | Voice : +27 (0)11 2545100 | > |--------------------------------------------------|

Eric Oliver wrote: > > It must have been a bad day. I laughed so hard I cried. I'm filing this for oc casional amusement. > > Eric Glad you liked it! I inserted a few typical relies from a few of the regular PIClist posters. Can anyone recognise them? -- Friendly Regards /"\ \ / Tjaart van der Walt X ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN spamBeGonetjaartspamBeGonewasp.co.za / \ AGAINST HTML MAIL |--------------------------------------------------| | Cellpoint Systems SA http://www.cellpt.com | |--------------------------------------------------| | http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html | | WGS84 : -26.0124 +28.1129 | | Voice : +27 (0)11 2545100 | |--------------------------------------------------|

At 06:54 11/06/99 +0200, you wrote: >Eric Oliver wrote: >> >> It must have been a bad day. I laughed so hard I cried. I'm filing this for occasional amusement. {Quote hidden}>> >> Eric > >Glad you liked it! I inserted a few typical relies from >a few of the regular PIClist posters. > >Can anyone recognise them? > >-- >Friendly Regards /"\ > \ / >Tjaart van der Walt X ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN >TakeThisOuTtjaartEraseMEspam_OUTwasp.co.za / \ AGAINST HTML MAIL >|--------------------------------------------------| >| Cellpoint Systems SA http://www.cellpt.com | >|--------------------------------------------------| >| http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html | >| WGS84 : -26.0124 +28.1129 | >| Voice : +27 (0)11 2545100 | >|--------------------------------------------------| > > Nope! :) By the way, how is the defence of the masters going? Dennis

> that infamous quote: > * No - but it is better than the Linux wankers and wannabees! reminds me: Question: is it possible to develop Linux programs and legally withhold your sou rce code for such ? I have been told that the "GNU licience" requires program release t o contain open source code, but this raises the question of how it is possible to develop for example an "access control" front end program and maintain application integrity ? I am sure someone has a good (or funny) answer, waiting... regards, Graham.

Question: is it possible to develop Linux programs and legally withhold your source code for such ? I have been told that the "GNU licience" requires program release to contain open source code... It has never been necessary to provide source for a program that was merely COMPILED by gnu software (ie gcc.) At one time it was possible to interpret the gnu license as requiring source distribution of any program that contained actual gnu CODE (including library functions.) At one time, cisco (which used and uses gcc and other tools) had their own itty-bitty embedded 68k library implemented specifically to avoid needing to include any gnu library code (this is harder in a linux invironment than an embedded environment, of course!) More recently, I believe that the gnu people have clarified and/or rewritten this part of their license. Now, if you write software that includes the gnu library functions, you need only be willing to provide the source for the gnu library you used (which is a piece of cake if it's not modified!) You don't have to provide your own source code. ... but this raises the question of how it is possible to develop for example an "access control" front end program and maintain application integrity ? Security-related applications had better not be dependent on "secret source" to be secure, or they're not really secure at all. (Been there, done that, renamed my "password encryption" feature "password obfuscation.") BillW cisco

> Question: is it possible to develop Linux programs and legally withhold your > source code for such ? Certainly, as long as you don't include any GPL'd code in your program. Just building your program with GNU tools doesn't generally make it subject to the GPL. Also, Linux normally uses dynamically linked shared libraries for all the standard libraries, so you don't have to worry too much about accidentally including GPL'd code. > I have been told that the "GNU licience" requires program release to contain > open source code, but this raises the question of how it is possible to > develop for example an "access control" front end program and maintain > application integrity ? I am sure someone has a good (or funny) answer, > waiting... No funny answer here, sorry. The only problem with using Linux in an embedded system is that since the kernel, standard libraries, and many of the standard tools are GPL'd, you have to provide sources for them, including any modifications you make. But you don't have to provide source for user-space applications you write yourself; as the author you can license your own code however you see fit. If you need a Unix-like OS for an embedded system, and can't use Linux because of the GPL, you can look at the BSD derivatives. They are not GPL'd, except for some variants that contain Ethernet drivers that were unfortunately stolen from Donald Becker.

BillW wrote: > More recently, I believe that the gnu people have clarified and/or rewritten > this part of their license. Now, if you write software that includes the > gnu library functions, you need only be willing to provide the source for > the gnu library you used (which is a piece of cake if it's not modified!) > You don't have to provide your own source code. You're talking about the LGPL (Lesser General Public License, formerly the Library General Public License). If you use LGPL'd code, such as glibc, you don't have to provide your source code, but... you have to provide your object code in a manner such that it can be linked to a newer version of the LGPL'd code. So you generally would have to provide your .o files or (equivalently) a .a archive of them. This wouldn't be a problem for a Linux application since the libraries are typically dynamically linked, but it could be a problem for using glibc in a non-Linux embedded system. For typical embedded systems, Cygnus' newlib might be preferred to glibc, Newlib is not GPL'd or LGPL'd; it's under a Berkely-style license. You don't have to give out source or .o files, but you do have to give CU Berkeley credit: [...] and that any documentation, advertising materials, and other materials related to such distribution and use acknowledge that the software was developed by the University of California, Berkeley.

On Fri, Jun 11, 1999 at 07:14:43PM +1200, Graham Daniel wrote: > > reminds me: > > Question: is it possible to develop Linux programs and legally withhold your s ource code > for such ? I have been told that the "GNU licience" requires program release to contain > open source code, but this raises the question of how it is possible to develo p for example > an "access control" front end program and maintain application integrity ? I am sure > someone has a good (or funny) answer, waiting... As others have said, as long as you don't try to include GPL'd source code directly -- in the form of source code -- into your own program, then you should be OK. Thus, if for example you wanted to have some regular expression matching capability in your program, but the stock regex code didn't exactly work for you, you can't simply modify the regex code and use that in your mainline code. You *could*, however, modify the regex library, publish it -- with source -- as a separate, GPL'd work, and then dynamically link that into your proprietary program. It would probably be much better, however, to work with the regex authors first to try to come up with a version that meets your needs. Note that companies such as Corel, Oracle, Sybase, Netscape and IBM are all shipping software for Linux systems without the need to release source code. And you can be sure that they are using GCC, or some direct derivitive (egcs, pgcc). Also, as Bill said, access control that depends on obscurity is woefully ineffective. Properly written access control software will be exactly as effective with disclosed source as without. --Bob -- ============================================================ Bob Drzyzgula It's not a problem RemoveMEbobTakeThisOuTdrzyzgula.org until something bad happens ============================================================