"«A change after 2.6.24 broke ndiswrapper by accidentally removing its access to GPL-only symbols,» noted Pavel Roskin, offering a patch to address the issue. Linux creator Linus Torvalds was unimpressed, «I'm not seeing why ndiswrapper should be treated separately. If it loads non-GPL modules, it shouldn't be able to use GPLONLY symbols» [...] «Ndiswrapper itself is *not* compatible with the GPL. Trying to claim that ndiswrapper somehow itself is GPL'd even though it then loads modules that aren't is stupid and pointless. Clearly it just re-exports those GPLONLY functions to code that is *not* GPL'd.» [...] « So stop blathering. ndiswrapper has one purpose, and one purpose only: to load non-GPL'd code. So OF COURSE it shouldn't touch GPLONLY functions. »"
Full story »
Read contents from Free Software Magazine
Anybody up to writing good directory software?
Tue, 2007-02-20 11:17 — David JonathanSince the very beginning, directories (of any kind) have had a very central role in the internet. (I have recently grown fond of Free Web Directory. Even Slashdot can be considered a directory: a collection of great news and invaluable user-generated comments. As far as software is concerned, doing a quick search on Google about software directories will return the free (as in freedom) software directories like Savannah, SourceForge, Freshmeat and so on, followed by shareware and freeware sites such as FileBuzz, PCWin Download Center and All Freeware (great if you're looking for shareware and freeware, but definitely less comprehensive than their free-as-in-freedom counterparts).
Is better education the key to finding better software?
Sat, 2007-03-03 03:25 — Edward RusselI read David Jonathon's article Anybody Up To Writing Good Directory Software? the other day, which got me thinking about software directories in general. As David mentioned, many of the software directories one finds when doing a quick google search are free as in beer, not as in freedom. But what interests me is the software directories that already exist, providing a combination of both free as in beer software, and open source software. Sites such as Freeware Downloads and Shareware Download don't advertise themselves as providing free as in liberty software, but each of them have a good selection of open source software available... if you know where to look.
Categories
Best karma users
From the staff of FSDaily: Comedians in Perth, Magicians in Perth, Bands in Perth
sgbeal
4 years 11 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago
Linus and his high horse...
Or maybe he's just high.
ndiswrapper is, like it or not, a critical component to many users (myself included). It provides that "last little link" for a machine which otherwise could not get online using native linux drivers. This includes the machine i'm typing this from, which uses an AVM/Fritz USB network adapter (which DOES have a Linux-native driver, but that driver corrupts about 10% of the data which goes through it, leaving ndiswrapper as the only alternative).
i've been a die-hard Linux users since the mid 1990's, and i would strongly consider switching to BSD or OpenSolaris if Linus continues to play hardball against ndiswrapper.
As i've said a thousand times (e.g. http://s11n.net/license.php), the GPL cannot guaranty freedom, and this is just another example of how it restricts freedoms.
aboutblank
4 years 11 weeks 8 hours 14 min ago
I Think You are Confused
I think you are confused about the issues here. One issue is that when you use NDISWrapper (this is licensed under the GPL) to load a proprietary binary module, your Linux will become "tainted". This is a problem because a tainted Linux kernel is effectively impossible to repair when something goes wrong. This is why Torvalds denounced NDISWrapper as its basic purpose means that it will never load a GPL compatible driver, it will only load binary modules which will taint the kernel which can ruin any integrity that Linux is supposed to have. You may go ahead and taint your Linux, just don't go to the Linux developers when something breaks.
The second issue is the Free Software Foundation's (FSF) idea of freedom. We (those of us with ideals that align with the FSF) believe that all users should have the right to help ourselves and cooperate within a community. To do this, we **must** have the four specific rights that RMS has defined as free software. We are not free if we don't have all those rights because relinquishing any right will result the user as being subject to the software proprietor. Any action that deprives the user of any of the four rights is not worth protecting as it harms society when they accept it.
The easiest way to make a program free is to release the program as part of the public domain. Taking this approach allows other people to take the free code and make it proprietary and then subjugate other people with our formerly free software. Such an action is very discouraging because our software is intended to liberate the people but some people use that very same program to subjugate other people.
The point of the GPL is to ensure that for EVERY user that has a copy of the GPLd program, the user WILL have all four freedoms of free software. The way it does this is that it prevents some of the actions that a software distributor might take to deprive the user of any free software right. So yes, it does restrict some actions, mainly any action that will deprive a recipient of the program the right to practise their free software right.
da.phreak
4 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago
kernel-liberator.sh or uncrippling the linux kernel
There are kernel sources. Those sources are easility patched. Have a look at my kernel liberator script that disables the gpl-only mechanism:
http://www.handwerx.net/?p=4
Warning: Kernel Developers might don't like it.