On Thu, Aug 13, 1998 at 11:57:26AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote: > On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, Michael Bramer wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 13, 1998 at 10:18:09AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote: > > > On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, Michael Bramer wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 1998 at 10:38:41PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No, copyrights do not cover stupidity, except when used in a sentance ;-) > > > > > > > > > > Why would you wish to lie to your users about the conformance of that > > > > > system? Your name would soon be mud when third party programs failed to > > > > > run on your system because it really wasn't compliant. > > > > > > > > This is the point! > > > > > > > > Why would Debian lie to ours users about the conformance of our systems? > > > > Our name (Debian) would soon be mud when third party programs failed to > > > > run on our system because it really wasn't compliant. > > > > > > > > Debian (and the others distribution) don't lie the users. (In the LJ: 'XXX > > > > isn't LCS conform. ... The LCS program on this distribution lie the Users...' > > > > A nice headline in the press.) > > > > > > > So you seem to agree that your arguments based on "your" suggested > > > alternate script have no basis, since Debian would never do that. > > > > > > Seems we agree ;-) > > > > not in all points :-( > > > > Debian don't change LCS programs in a way, that the program say: 'conform' > > but the System is not conform. > > > I have no idea what idea you are trying to express here. If Debian does > not change in any way, and the program says it is conformant, why would > the system not comform? The program reports "This system is conformant" > when all the libs and programs are in the "correct" place. When Debian > conforms, the program will say so. What I say: Debian make no changes on the LCS-Program on the way, that the program say 'This system is LCS conform' although the system is not LCS conform. Debian don't lie the users of the system! > > But Debian may change 'Pathnames', 'Language' and so. > Not with this copyright, and that is just as it should be. unfortunately > > And with this Copyright, Debian can't do this. Debian can not support it! > Do you mean that Debian can not support the standard? Bull. No. A standard is a good thing. But Debian can't support the foreign user, can't change pathnames, ... This is not a good thing! Debian have no problems with standards! > POSIX and ANSI are both very proprietary documents. Debian has no problems > conforming to them. Why should this standard be any less supportable. > > If you mean the program can not be "supported" by Debian, then that is > exactly what the copyright intends. For Debian, support means package and > change, neither of which are desired by this program. No change of the standard. But changes of the code without lie the user. > BTW, I seem to have been unsubscribed from all debian list server mailing > lists, so I'm not recieving any of the list traffic on this. Probably a > blessing in disguise. Debian has a dns-problem. But a see this message : Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 11:57:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> on the debian-devel list! I hope the problem are away. Grisu -- Michael Bramer - a Debian Certified Linux Developer http://www.debian.org PGP: finger grisu@master.debian.org -- Linux Sysadmin -- Use Debian Linux "A system without Perl is like a hockey game without a fight." -- Mitch Wright
Attachment:
pgpmnuMwL38Zp.pgp
Description: PGP signature