Porteus

Guys,

Maybe I'm wrong, but I have noticed that the startup script and USB build code, modified for Porteus, is NOT on the new website. The Slax scripts are available on LinuxLive.org--but these are NOT the same, because ours have been modified. If Porteus is under the GPL, then we need to put the startup and USB build scripts either on this site, an external site, or allow someone to wget the files in Porteus. If not, then we really need to get the Porteus Doc Team together to write a guide on how to get the scripts within Porteus.

If we indeed have a GPLed project, and want to say "the world is open source", and we don't have all the source, then we NEED to have source available to keep Tomas M's dream of that a reality. Again--maybe I'm wrong, and haven't seen all the source code on the site--but if it isn't there, we need to add it. I know that Slax definitely did. Slax was one of the best distros ever--let's make ours even BETTER. Thanks for reading!!

-- Andrew

@agreimann
Porteus code is still evolving as we are in rc stage. just added a function to linuxrc which discovers if booting media is removable, if not then in case of doing 'copy2ram' hard drive partition is not unmounted (no point for this).
When 1.0 is out we can gather all scripts in one tarball and post on the main site.

Thanks for suggestion.

Glad that we'll have all the source out--I think that follows the tradition of Slax and the GPL well. And, it does make a lot of sense not to have the full source laid out in beta stage.

Go Porteus!

Yeah i believe we've discussed the GPL issue before. Porteus will remove it's underwear and reveal all to the public after official v1.0. We don't want the GPL police knocking down our door now. I have absolutely no idea how to do this, so hopefully Fanthom does.

Yeah--I was really making a suggestion, because that was just something I noticed, and Porteus is GPLed. But... yeah, I was mainly saying this so we *don't* have anyone saying we're not adhering to the GPL.
So... hopefully, they can all read this post!

We needs to change of header of porteus' scripts.

Example :

Author : Hamza <hamza@porteus.org>

This file is part of Porteus.

Porteus is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
any later version.

Porteus is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
GNU General Public License for more details.

You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with Foobar. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

@Hamza
dont think it's necessary.

/porteus/License.txt clearly states: it means that ALL stuff included in the ISO is released under GPL with only small exceptions.
individual licenses are provided separately, example: /001/lib/firmware/LICENCE.agere
some non free packages puts their licenses in /usr/doc (like xvba). this folder is deleted by default to save space on the ISO. we may have to exclude these from being deleted.
this is my next task.

@brokenman - will send you all necessary licenses which cant be deleted by your cleanup script.

thanks for the input guys.

I think Porteus fully meets the GPL, especially after seeing this post.

Why create new thread?

I have a topic that discusses the GPL issue:

http://porteus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=67

No offense, but is this not the same as what you are bringing to the discussion?

Hmm... great point! Had I seen your thread first, I wouldn't have posted! Thanks for pointing this out. As you can see from my initial post in this thread, I totally agree with you that if we are to comply with the GPL, we will need all the source available.

The good news is that it will be available with the first release.

@agriemann, you are only a little bit desesperado, take it easy, we will comply with all requirements of GPL and others too, if necessary; we are no "foo bar", take it easy... 8)

Regards!

I have no doubt that Porteus will be GPL compliant. It's not right now--but the cool part is that it's 95% near that. The missing 5%, I would think, is the boot scripts.

With that in mind, I'm not a "desperate guy" (I'm guessing that is the rough translation) about Porteus meeting this license or license(s). The purpose of this post was to SERIOUSLY let the Porteus community know that unless we release the source with the final release (which Porteus will), we have the *possibility* of getting in trouble. Not necessarily that we even would--but it would be wise to include source to avoid getting into GPL troubles. The entire purpose was to *help* Porteus, not hurt it. Not sure how things are elsewhere, but copyrights are taken pretty seriously by the U.S., where I live.

And, with that said, Porteus will get where it needs to soon. I'm confident of that, and I say "go Porteus!" Thanks for the input.

Porteus will be ok. Let's not worry about this too much. I just had posted a heads up on GPL.

I had read sometime ago about licenses and how the GPL is good and how it is bad. It is good because it allows folks to get code, but there is a catch and the catch is you have to release your code as well so if you improved something, you have to give it back and your competitors can get it too and also be as good if not better , Some folks say that it hinders progress and does not allow competitors or yourself to get any advantage ? Some folks prefer other licenses because they allow more things and you don't have to give your code back .

Some folks have had problems before (Linux distros), and that was what is pointed out. We have a very solid porteus in both 32 and 64 bit versions and because of the GPL the code to the modifications and original programs(slackware based) need to be made available so that anyone that asks for something will not complain/sue or do any malicious activity.

Like I've reiterated, I think Porteus will be okay as well. Once we get to the final release, I think we should release everything, to avoid troubles. That's all I'm saying.

Regards,

-- Andrew

fanthom have already posted our GPL License