same old hypocrisy
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tuxchick Sep 13, 2008 7:05 PM EDT |
Closed, binary kernel modules are not allowed under the GPL. Period. They are tolerated because Linus wants them to be. Quoting: But the concept of interoperability goes beyond this, and it can run into a brick wall with absolutists on both sides. If you can’t touch the code you can’t interoperate. You can’t virtualize. Funny how the proprietary absolutists always get a pass, and it's always up to the FOSS side to compromise. And if they don't, they're zealots. |
| jacog Sep 17, 2008 6:11 AM EDT |
I already hate the word "Interoperability"... it's honestly sounding more and more like a swearword to me. The definition of "interoperability" can read something along the lines of :: "Finding new ways to completely ignore standards." If we all used and contributed to the open standards, there could be actual real honest-to-goodness interoperability... not just hacks and closed solutions to make product A work with product B. The latter does not benefit everyone. EDIT: Actually, if ya want to give me interoperability, make Gnome and KDE applications work better together, |
| gus3 Sep 17, 2008 11:48 AM EDT |
Naive response: I just opened KEdit and gedit, and I can read text files, save text files, and cut/copy/paste between them. Doesn't that count? |
| dinotrac Sep 17, 2008 2:18 PM EDT |
TC - I accidentally put my comment in the other thread, but the "not allowed period" really isn't correct. Not allowed by the GPL, perhaps, but there are cases under which you don't need the GPL's permission to do something. And, you will remember, that you can create your own closed binary modules all day and every day. You just can't distribute them IF (and only if) they incorporate somebody else's GPL'd code and that somebody else has not granted permission to you to distribute their stuff. |
| tqk Oct 07, 2008 9:42 PM EDT |
Quoting:I already hate the word "Interoperability"... it's honestly sounding more and more like a swearword to me.Agreed, thx. Quoting:If we all used and contributed to the open standards, there could be actual real honest-to-goodness interoperability... not just hacks and closed solutions to make product A work with product B. The latter does not benefit everyone.Those are little guys. You ignore the prime offender (which, those of which you speak follow slavishly), which has never had any intention to follow agreed standards, and in fact has actively worked (OOXML) to obsolete them as a prime piece of their business plan. [Sorry for all the which's]. |
| rijelkentaurus Oct 07, 2008 9:52 PM EDT |
Quoting: Sorry for all the which's Well, it is almost Halloween. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!