#debian - Wed 9 May 2007 between 20:39 and 20:48

NY Lost Funds



BUMBACL0Tdpkg
madrissbrb ill try these instructions
JordiGHxoz: They have. And I disagree with their conclusions anyways.
madrisslooks like theyr just using a dist cd to install grub, so maybe installing debian will fix it
JordiGHstew: Btw, I only see one dictionary who includes documentation as part of the definition of "software": http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/software
BUMBACL0Twhy's dpkg dead?
JordiGHstew: And you don't need to modify people's opinions. It's illegal to do that anyways: that's called slander.
madrissBUMBACLOT: yeah i noticed that.. dunno why though
JordiGHstew: To me Debian arguing that the GFDL is non-free is akin to BSD zealots saying that the GPL is non-free.
madrissfouressence: good news is its still showing as 32GB of stuff is on the other partition so its not destroyed completely yet lol
stewJordiGH: i'm sorry you think i have slandered anybody. i don't know what I might have said to make you think that>
fouressencemadriss: Always a good thing. :)
madrissah
oh nm
JordiGHstew: You want to modify an RMS rant. Or perhaps you'd like to change the MOTIVATION newspaper article that was distributed with Emacs in order to make it seem like the results reported in the article occurred otherwise. Both of those are not rights you need nor even should have.
stewJordiGH: i want to do no such thing. I never said i wanted to do such a thing
JordiGHstew: Good. Then the GFDL is good enough for you.
stewJordiGH: no it isn't
JordiGHstew: Why not? You don't want to do the things it prohibits.
stewJordiGH: i want to remove the manifesto
madrisswriting to the new partition now... omg its scary ive never partitioned anything before its like im destroying my computer lol
JordiGHstew: Why? It's insignificant in size compared with the rest. Why would you want to remove it?
stewJordiGH: it doesn't matter why
karstenJordiGH: How many do you see who include it in their definition of hardware.
JordiGHstew: Would you like to remove the copyright statement too or the acknowledgment clauses? You're gonna argue the BSD licenses are non-free because they make you keep attributions?
karstenJordiGH: And BSD folks (the smart ones at any rate, which is to say most of those involved in actually managing distros) don't argue that GPL is non-free, but that they don't agree with its philosophy.
JordiGH: ... which is entirely fair.
stewJordiGH: i don't want to do any of those things
JordiGHstew: So why are attributions free but a manifesto that's incomparable in size with te rest of the document non-free?
karstenJordiGH: attributions of authorship?
x_linkBAAAAAAAAHHH!
JordiGHkarsten: True. I was talking about BSD zealots, though. It's rather funny how OpenBSD wouldn't include GPL code in the kernel, though.
x_linkI helped DawnLight for 30 minutes
I wrote shitload of stuff for him and now he quits
ahh
DawnLight: =)
JordiGHDawnLight: We were just talking about you.
JoshHinane license arguments put me to sleep
karstenJordiGH: I can see why they wouldn't include it in the kernel, it's an incompatible license. Fact is OpenBSD has a stated goal (policy) of replacing GPL'd code with non-GPL'd equivalents wherever possible.
DawnLightyou were

Page: 5 12 19 26 33 40 47 54 61 68 75 82 89 96 103 110 117 124 131 138 145 152 159 166 173 

IrcArchive

NY Lost Funds