ru.linux

 
 - RU.LINUX ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 From : Sergey Lentsov                       2:4615/71.10   28 Mar 2002  17:36:46
 To : All
 Subject : URL: http://www.lwn.net/2002/0328/letters.php3
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 

    [1][LWN Logo] [2][oasisi.php?s=2&w=468&h=60] 
    [LWN.net]
 
    Sections:
     [3]Main page
     [4]Security
     [5]Kernel
     [6]Distributions
     [7]Development
     [8]Commerce
     [9]Linux in the news
     [10]Announcements
     Letters
    [11]All in one big page
 
    See also: [12]last week's Letters page.
 
 Letters to the editor
 
    Letters to the editor should be sent to [13]letters@lwn.net.
    Preference will be given to letters which are short, to the point, and
    well written. If you want your email address "anti-spammed" in some
    way please be sure to let us know. We do not have a policy against
    anonymous letters, but we will be reluctant to include them.
    March 28, 2002
 From:    Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: Exit sections and monolithic kernels
 Date:    Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:02:41 +1100
 
 You say
 
 > useless "undefined reference to `local symbols in discarded section
 > .text.exit'" message that accompanies a failed link
 
 These messages are not useless, on the contrary they are detecting
 coding errors where people call functions that have not been included
 in the kernel.  These are kernel bugs just waiting to happen.  When
 binutils started checking for dangling references, it flushed out
 several coding errors.  The down side is that we have to tell the
 kernel which dangling references to ignore, using __devexit_p.
 From:    Stephen.Schaefer@emis-intl.com
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: Re: [m]ore GPL confusion
 Date:    Mon, 25 Mar 2002 23:55:32 -0500 (EST)
 
 In my understanding of the GPL, there is an important freedom one
 retains when using GPL software: you are under no obligation until you
 transfer rights in the software (``give it'') to someone else.  If you
 obtain a copy and modify it for your own use, noone's going to track you
 down and require you to divulge the changes *unless and until* you
 provide the software to someone else.  IANAL, but it seems you could go
 so far as to provide services using the modified GPL software, again, so
 long as you did not distribute the software itself to any other entity.
 Otherwise, there would be no need for the Affero GPL, in which such
 occlusion of the service is specifically prohibited.
 
 Example: suppose you take GPL scheduling software and modify it to
 include your cement company's trade secret algorithm for scheduling
 cement trucks.  Are you in any way required to divulge your
 modifications?  No.  Suppose you start offering cement truck
 scheduling as a service to other cement companies.  Unless the
 scheduling software was published under the Affero GPL, you can still
 keep your trade secret.  Now suppose you wanted to sell cement truck
 scheduling software.  It is only in this case that you would be
 required to choose between replacing all the GPL licensed code with
 differently licensed code (possibly with the same code, but licensed
 differently from the copyright holder), or publishing the full source
 and developing a service-oriented business model supporting and
 refining the published software.
 
 For reasons I don't understand, people cannot seem to comprehend that
 although Free Software advocates want universal participation,
 we do not, through the GPL, compel it.  The GPL is a highly pragmatic
 compromise.  The world would be unimaginably richer if information *were*
 free, but GPL software is no more than an invitation to a beguiling
 half shadow of that world.
 
         - Stephen P. Schaefer
 From:    =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Leandro_Guimar=E3es_Faria_Corsetti_Dutra?=
          <leandrod@mac.com>
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: Hurd and proprietary software
 Date:    Thu, 21 Mar 2002 09:56:07 +0100
 
  > We are working at clarifying things further, in an attempt to
  > discover (and fairly represent) what the Free Software
  > Foundation's objections are with regard to the existing, fully
  > free distributions. Stay tuned...
 
         No work needed here.  The meaning of RMS' declaration is clear, and
 clearly documented in the FSF site, besides being clear in the
 history of the relation between Debian and GNU.  While Debian and
 GNU work closely together, and at one time Debian was considered to
 be part of GNU, their differences is that GNU wants to be completely
 free, while Debian has this hair-splitting about providing
 proprietary software (along with free software that depends on
 proprietary software) as add-ons to the official, completely free
 standard Debian software distribution.
 --
   _
 / \ Leandro Guimaraes Faria Corsetti Dutra        +41 (21) 216 15 93
 \ / [14]http://homepage.mac.com./leandrod/        fax +41 (21) 216 19 04
   X  [15]http://tutoriald.sf.net./               Orange Communications CH
 / \ Campanha fita ASCII, contra correio HTML      +41 (21) 644 23 01
 From:    Leon Brooks <leon@cyberknights.com.au>
 To:      Jeroen Dekkers <jeroen@dekkers.cx>
 Subject: A flying Hurd
 Date:    Sat, 23 Mar 2002 21:20:34 +0800
 Cc:      letters@lwn.net
 
 > The following sentence doesn't make much sense to me either: "Thus,
 > it seems unlikely that the HURD will mount a substantial challenge
 > to the established free kernels anytime soon."
 
 Pretty easy to understand, really, since you already have all of the pieces
 of the problem:
 
 > Although the current implementation doesn't show it, the design of
 > the Hurd and the ideas behind it really rock.
 
 ...words 2 through 7 are your answer.
 
 When the current implementation does show it, the Hurd will have acheived
 airspeed. And impressive it will be, as well, there's lots of drool-over and
 kick-ass stuff in there.
 
 Given the time it's taken so far, the Hurd's logo really does need to be a
 squadron of winged pigs (it will win hearts, trust me), or perhaps the Spruce
 Goose, but I think most of the Hurd's team members take it too seriously to
 let that happen. (-:
 
 Cheers; Leon
 From:    wa6cvl@sbcglobal.net
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: abe lincoln and the digital pirates
 Date:    Wed, 27 Mar 2002 11:39:00 -0800
 Cc:      wa6cvl@qsl.net
 
        Mr Eisner:
         I just read your essay that was posted to the Financial Times. I
 feel sorry for the problems that you're having. And I respect the
 existance ofthe Capitalist system that we enjoy. But contrary to popular
 thought, Capitalists (such as yourself) should not be protected and enhanced by
 government intervention. Your tale of woe ignores the fact that copyrights
 were once of shorted duration, that they were non-renewable, that "Fair Use"
 was a bonafide consideration. These laws were originally written to protect
 individuals, not corporations. In the spirit of freedom.  I believe that the
 government should become less involved.. And mr eisner, intellectual
 property rights are not synonamous with monopoly rights..
         Instead of talking about the CBDTPA as a solution, let's look at a
 CBDTPA assault of the automobile and the freeway system.
         In  the following analogy:
         1. Any Vehicle = digital device such as a computer.
         2. Roadways   = networks
 
 Be it proposed that it be prohibited to build or modify any vehicle that can
 be used in in criminal activity. Such vehicle should not be function in the
 commission of any crime, or even the appearance of a crime. If necessary,
 the USA will fund and innovate measures to ensure that such standard can be
 innovated. Fair Use will not be allowed to any vehicle that is even capable
 of being  used in a criminal manner.
         Gosh, Mr Eisner, with your guidance, we could interpret a crowbar in
 the trunk as a burglary tool, and insist that car automatically disable..
         If this proves fully successful, we will extend to Political
 Correctness cause also..
         Perhaps the government can fund a plan to identify wrong doing in
 advance. If your car stops suddenly, you must've been about to do
 something bad.....
 
         AND SO ON.......
 
 de jerry
 From:    "Howland, Curtis" <howlandc@kvh.co.jp>
 To:      <letters@lwn.net>, <dlc@radix.net>
 Subject: Seen in the March 21st Letters...
 Date:    Wed, 27 Mar 2002 11:25:40 +0900
 
 Dear LWN,
 
 In the March 21st letters section, David Craig considers the statement that
 "Yes, it's true: the U.S. government really wants to outlaw free software."
 to be inflammatory and beneath the journalistic standards I have come to
 expect from your Web site."
 
 I consider the statement, if actually written by LWN, to be rather a mild
 understatement. A cursory glance at the 5 Million laws on the books in
 America demonstrate that control over ones own life, be it in terms of
 labor or software, is the last thing that the various governments in the
 U.S. want you to have.
 
 Government is about control. Free software, as in beer or speech, endangers
 that control.
 
 Curt-
 - ---
 Written from, not for, work.
 From:    "jacob navia" <jacob.navia@wanadoo.fr>
 To:      <letters@lwn.net>
 Subject: zlib
 Date:    Sat, 23 Mar 2002 22:22:24 +0100
 
 zlib corrupts malloc data structures via double free. This vulnerability
 impacts all major Linux vendors. It may impact every Linux installation on
 Earth. Updates are required to zlib and any packages that were statically
 built with the zlib code
 
 Wouldn't be a good idea to modify free() so that it never frees twice?
 
 When a pointer is passed to it, free should look up if the address is a valid
 address, and set an error flag and do nothing if the address is incorrect.
 
 This does not mean that a huge list of addresses must be maintained, but just
 some range checking could greatly speed up the process.
 
 I do not think that writing a better free() is completely beyond the reach of
 the clib people isn't it?
 
 This would fix all of those bugs in Linux forever, without any need for
 patching all buggy applications, or waiting till all those bugs surface!
 
 But who develops now for security?
 From:    "Robert A. Knop Jr." <rknop@pobox.com>
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: A note of praise for Seagate
 Date:    Tue, 26 Mar 2002 18:36:36 -0600
 
 I was having some trouble reading a DDS3 tape written with an HP drive
 on a Seagate Archive Python 04016 DDS3 drive.  It turned out that the
 solution was that I needed to issue a "mt setblk 10240" command on the
 Seagate drive to get the blocksize it was using set for how the tape was
 written.  However, along the way I cruised by Seagate's support site for
 the drive, and saw that there was a firmware upgrade available.  I was
 prepared to be annoyed, as the firmware upgarde was a DOS archive
 including a program to run to patch the upgrade.  (I don't run Windows
 or DOS at all on the machine with the tape drive.)
 
 However, poking around, I discovered that Seagate's got a diagnostic and
 firmware patching program available for Linux (in addition to Netware,
 Windows, and Solaris).  Hence, I was able to upgrade my firmware (even
 though that wasn't the solution to the problem at hand).  This utility
 may be found on:
 
   [16]http://www.seagate.com/support/tape/utils/stdiag.html
 
 I don't know if there is a central information clearinghouse for how
 "linux frendly" various vendors are.  You can find that information for
 scanners on the SANE page, for printers on the gimp-print page, and for
 other devices *sometimes* on their pages.  This is the sort of
 information that would be nice to have, however, before making purchase
 decisions.
 
 -Rob Knop
 rknop@pobox.com
    [17]Eklektix, Inc. Linux powered! Copyright Л 2002 [18]Eklektix, Inc.,
    all rights reserved
    Linux (R) is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds
 
 References
 
    1. http://lwn.net/
    2. http://oasis.lwn.net/oasisc.php?s=2&w=468&h=60
    3. http://lwn.net/2002/0328/
    4. http://lwn.net/2002/0328/security.php3
    5. http://lwn.net/2002/0328/kernel.php3
    6. http://lwn.net/2002/0328/dists.php3
    7. http://lwn.net/2002/0328/devel.php3
    8. http://lwn.net/2002/0328/commerce.php3
    9. http://lwn.net/2002/0328/press.php3
   10. http://lwn.net/2002/0328/announce.php3
   11. http://lwn.net/2002/0328/bigpage.php3
   12. http://lwn.net/2002/0321/letters.php3
   13. mailto:letters@lwn.net
   14. http://homepage.mac.com/leandrod/
   15. http://tutoriald.sf.net/
   16. http://www.seagate.com/support/tape/utils/stdiag.html
   17. http://www.eklektix.com/
   18. http://www.eklektix.com/
 
 --- ifmail v.2.14.os7-aks1
  * Origin: Unknown (2:4615/71.10@fidonet)
 
 

Вернуться к списку тем, сортированных по: возрастание даты  уменьшение даты  тема  автор