* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-12 5:32 ` Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com] Rob Landley
@ 2013-07-12 5:59 ` John Spencer
2013-07-12 6:52 ` Isaac
2013-07-12 14:34 ` Kurt H Maier
2 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: John Spencer @ 2013-07-12 5:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl; +Cc: Rob Landley
On 07/12/2013 07:32 AM, Rob Landley wrote:
> If you were looking for a list of packages to test musl against before
> 1.0, the Open Invention Network seems to have come up with a list of 593
> packages they define as "The Linux System".
>
> Might be worth a look, for bragging rights if nothing else. (See attached.)
>
> Rob
http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/pat_linuxdef_table5.php
i wonder if the package nr. 257, dietlibc, builds against musl...
kidding aside, this list looks like a snapshot of installed packages on
some random opensuse box, including suse's package manager zypper and a
full KDE3 install.
>
> ======quoted message from License <license@openinventionnetwork.com>,
> subject "OIN Notice - Definition Update"======
>> July 9, 2013
>>
>> Dear Open Invention Network Licensee:
>>
>> We are pleased to announce that effective on September 10, 2013, the Open
>> Invention Network will expand the definition of the Linux System set
>> forth
>> on our website, http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/pat_linuxdef.php,
>> which
>> modifies the rights under OIN’s license agreements, by adding a new
>> Table 5
>> that includes adding 293 new packages to the definition of Linux
>> System per
>> the attached letter. The new Table 5 also updates version numbers for 593
>> packages in the Linux System as listed in the attached letter.
>>
>> This change will apply to all members of OIN, associate members, and
>> licensees (collectively, the “OIN Licensee Community”) other than as
>> limited by the existing carve-outs, thereby broadening the scope of the
>> license and release that you receive from OIN and the OIN Licensee
>> Community as well as the scope of the license and release you grant
>> back to
>> OIN and the OIN Licensee Community.
>>
>> This letter serves as notice pursuant to Section 2.1 of the License
>> Agreement between you and OIN. All changes to your license agreement and
>> the Linux System Definition are available for review on the OIN
>> website at
>> http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Keith Bergelt
>> Chief Executive Officer
>> Open Invention Network LLC
>>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-12 5:32 ` Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com] Rob Landley
2013-07-12 5:59 ` John Spencer
@ 2013-07-12 6:52 ` Isaac
2013-07-12 14:34 ` Kurt H Maier
2 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Isaac @ 2013-07-12 6:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:32:27AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> If you were looking for a list of packages to test musl against
> before 1.0, the Open Invention Network seems to have come up with a
> list of 593 packages they define as "The Linux System".
>
Not 593 packages; they _renumbered_ 593 of ~2000, and added another 293.
It includes anaconda, yum, zypper, yast2, and rpm, but not dpkg, alien, or
any of the apt* packages.
It also includes all of Android.
And it's got gnome and kde and gnash.
> Might be worth a look, for bragging rights if nothing else. (See
> attached.)
>
> Rob
>
> ======quoted message from License
> <license@openinventionnetwork.com>, subject "OIN Notice - Definition
> Update"======
> >July 9, 2013
> >
> >Dear Open Invention Network Licensee:
> >
> >We are pleased to announce that effective on September 10, 2013,
> >the Open
> >Invention Network will expand the definition of the Linux System
> >set forth
> >on our website,
> >http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/pat_linuxdef.php, which
> >modifies the rights under OIN???s license agreements, by adding a
> >new Table 5
> >that includes adding 293 new packages to the definition of Linux
> >System per
> >the attached letter. The new Table 5 also updates version numbers
> >for 593
> >packages in the Linux System as listed in the attached letter.
> >
> >This change will apply to all members of OIN, associate members, and
> >licensees (collectively, the ???OIN Licensee Community???) other than as
> >limited by the existing carve-outs, thereby broadening the scope
> >of the
> >license and release that you receive from OIN and the OIN Licensee
> >Community as well as the scope of the license and release you
> >grant back to
> >OIN and the OIN Licensee Community.
> >
> >This letter serves as notice pursuant to Section 2.1 of the License
> >Agreement between you and OIN. All changes to your license
> >agreement and
> >the Linux System Definition are available for review on the OIN
> >website at
> >http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/.
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >Keith Bergelt
> >Chief Executive Officer
> >Open Invention Network LLC
> >
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> The Lone Ranger with Johnny Depp and Armie Hammer
> http://click.lavabit.com/gusaoukbfhf181sxhjazmzonohxte5hddtwmnbxtfygcu6cr7rib/
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-12 5:32 ` Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com] Rob Landley
2013-07-12 5:59 ` John Spencer
2013-07-12 6:52 ` Isaac
@ 2013-07-12 14:34 ` Kurt H Maier
2013-07-12 15:53 ` Rich Felker
2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Kurt H Maier @ 2013-07-12 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:32:27AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> If you were looking for a list of packages to test musl against before
> 1.0, the Open Invention Network seems to have come up with a list of
> 593 packages they define as "The Linux System".
This list looks like something a crazy person put together. It's
basically everything available in OpenSUSE plus the android SDK. There
is garbage in here like mono and mod_ruby.
khm
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-12 14:34 ` Kurt H Maier
@ 2013-07-12 15:53 ` Rich Felker
2013-07-12 16:18 ` Justin Cormack
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rich Felker @ 2013-07-12 15:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 10:34:57AM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:32:27AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > If you were looking for a list of packages to test musl against before
> > 1.0, the Open Invention Network seems to have come up with a list of
> > 593 packages they define as "The Linux System".
>
> This list looks like something a crazy person put together. It's
> basically everything available in OpenSUSE plus the android SDK. There
> is garbage in here like mono and mod_ruby.
Indeed, this sounds like nothing but "Pointy Hair Linux" conformance,
which I think we can do without. Trying to meet these requirements is
akin to ISO C adding Annex K and other junk to make Microsoft happy.
They knew there was no hope of Microsoft actually adopting the C
standard, so why even bother trying to make them happy? Similarly,
"Pointy Hair Linux" is not adopting musl anytime soon, so worrying
about conforming to their silly requirements seems like a waste of
time and energy...
Rich
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-12 15:53 ` Rich Felker
@ 2013-07-12 16:18 ` Justin Cormack
2013-07-12 16:32 ` Rich Felker
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Justin Cormack @ 2013-07-12 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1260 bytes --]
On 12 Jul 2013 16:53, "Rich Felker" <dalias@aerifal.cx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 10:34:57AM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:32:27AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > > If you were looking for a list of packages to test musl against before
> > > 1.0, the Open Invention Network seems to have come up with a list of
> > > 593 packages they define as "The Linux System".
> >
> > This list looks like something a crazy person put together. It's
> > basically everything available in OpenSUSE plus the android SDK. There
> > is garbage in here like mono and mod_ruby.
>
> Indeed, this sounds like nothing but "Pointy Hair Linux" conformance,
> which I think we can do without. Trying to meet these requirements is
> akin to ISO C adding Annex K and other junk to make Microsoft happy.
> They knew there was no hope of Microsoft actually adopting the C
> standard, so why even bother trying to make them happy? Similarly,
> "Pointy Hair Linux" is not adopting musl anytime soon, so worrying
> about conforming to their silly requirements seems like a waste of
> time and energy...
>
> Rich
Its not a standard, its a list of things that are broadly "Linux" in terms
of the point of the group which is an anti patent pool...
Justin
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1620 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-12 16:18 ` Justin Cormack
@ 2013-07-12 16:32 ` Rich Felker
2013-07-12 17:00 ` Kurt H Maier
2013-07-16 6:37 ` Rob Landley
0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rich Felker @ 2013-07-12 16:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 05:18:46PM +0100, Justin Cormack wrote:
> On 12 Jul 2013 16:53, "Rich Felker" <dalias@aerifal.cx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 10:34:57AM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:32:27AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > > > If you were looking for a list of packages to test musl against before
> > > > 1.0, the Open Invention Network seems to have come up with a list of
> > > > 593 packages they define as "The Linux System".
> > >
> > > This list looks like something a crazy person put together. It's
> > > basically everything available in OpenSUSE plus the android SDK. There
> > > is garbage in here like mono and mod_ruby.
> >
> > Indeed, this sounds like nothing but "Pointy Hair Linux" conformance,
> > which I think we can do without. Trying to meet these requirements is
> > akin to ISO C adding Annex K and other junk to make Microsoft happy.
> > They knew there was no hope of Microsoft actually adopting the C
> > standard, so why even bother trying to make them happy? Similarly,
> > "Pointy Hair Linux" is not adopting musl anytime soon, so worrying
> > about conforming to their silly requirements seems like a waste of
> > time and energy...
> >
> > Rich
>
> Its not a standard, its a list of things that are broadly "Linux" in terms
> of the point of the group which is an anti patent pool...
OK, I think we may have all misunderstood the point of this list.
Rich
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-12 16:32 ` Rich Felker
@ 2013-07-12 17:00 ` Kurt H Maier
2013-07-13 5:56 ` Luca Barbato
2013-07-16 6:37 ` Rob Landley
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Kurt H Maier @ 2013-07-12 17:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:32:15PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 05:18:46PM +0100, Justin Cormack wrote:
> >
> > Its not a standard, its a list of things that are broadly "Linux" in terms
> > of the point of the group which is an anti patent pool...
>
> OK, I think we may have all misunderstood the point of this list.
I stand by my claim that a crazy person did this. Table 5 contains
"Sugar Labs," which isn't even a damn software package, it's a
non-profit that develops the Sugar learning environment. It's like
claiming freedesktop.org is "linux". I strongly doubt a human being
actually looked at any part of this before copy-pasting it into their
website.
khm
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-12 17:00 ` Kurt H Maier
@ 2013-07-13 5:56 ` Luca Barbato
2013-07-13 14:34 ` Kurt H Maier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Luca Barbato @ 2013-07-13 5:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
On 07/12/2013 07:00 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:32:15PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 05:18:46PM +0100, Justin Cormack wrote:
>>>
>>> Its not a standard, its a list of things that are broadly "Linux" in terms
>>> of the point of the group which is an anti patent pool...
>>
>> OK, I think we may have all misunderstood the point of this list.
>
> I stand by my claim that a crazy person did this. Table 5 contains
> "Sugar Labs," which isn't even a damn software package, it's a
> non-profit that develops the Sugar learning environment. It's like
> claiming freedesktop.org is "linux". I strongly doubt a human being
> actually looked at any part of this before copy-pasting it into their
> website.
Why are we looking at this? They OIN would be quite happy to have musl
into the list and hopefully provide patent cover in case somebody claims
some part musl are patented.
lu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-13 5:56 ` Luca Barbato
@ 2013-07-13 14:34 ` Kurt H Maier
2013-07-13 14:57 ` Luca Barbato
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Kurt H Maier @ 2013-07-13 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 07:56:21AM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
>
> Why are we looking at this? They OIN would be quite happy to have musl
> into the list and hopefully provide patent cover in case somebody claims
> some part musl are patented.
>
I'm sure they would. I'd rather see musl never have anything to do with
any patent-based organization at all, much less take sides with some
ridiculous corporate arms race. Especially as I can't find any actual
evidence that this company has *done* anything.
I think using pkgsrc is a great option, which Gregor has already been
doing. It's pretty obvious the OIN list is not vetted or paid attention
to; they just want as many linuxy words as possible so they can make
noises at the watering hole.
khm
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-13 14:34 ` Kurt H Maier
@ 2013-07-13 14:57 ` Luca Barbato
2013-07-13 21:19 ` Harald Becker
2013-07-18 3:38 ` Anthony G. Basile
0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Luca Barbato @ 2013-07-13 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
On 07/13/2013 04:34 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> I think using pkgsrc is a great option, which Gregor has already been
> doing. It's pretty obvious the OIN list is not vetted or paid attention
> to; they just want as many linuxy words as possible so they can make
> noises at the watering hole.
Remind me to try to make a Gentoo stage3 based on musl later, btw what's
the status of musl-specific patches on gcc upstream?
lu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-13 14:57 ` Luca Barbato
@ 2013-07-13 21:19 ` Harald Becker
2013-07-18 3:38 ` Anthony G. Basile
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Harald Becker @ 2013-07-13 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: musl, lu_zero
Hi Lu !
13-07-2013 16:57 Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org>:
> Remind me to try to make a Gentoo stage3 based on musl later,
> btw what's the status of musl-specific patches on gcc upstream?
1) Let me now when this stage3 is available, I'm very keen to
test it.
2) May be I'm able to help creating this. I never created the
Gentoo stages yet, but I create my own systems based on Gentoo
with many differences, know a bit how to read/hack those ebuilds
and should be able to bootstrap a system from scratch.
Harald
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-13 14:57 ` Luca Barbato
2013-07-13 21:19 ` Harald Becker
@ 2013-07-18 3:38 ` Anthony G. Basile
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Anthony G. Basile @ 2013-07-18 3:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl
On 07/13/2013 10:57 AM, Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 07/13/2013 04:34 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>> I think using pkgsrc is a great option, which Gregor has already been
>> doing. It's pretty obvious the OIN list is not vetted or paid attention
>> to; they just want as many linuxy words as possible so they can make
>> noises at the watering hole.
>
> Remind me to try to make a Gentoo stage3 based on musl later, btw what's
> the status of musl-specific patches on gcc upstream?
>
> lu
>
Luca, I have that partially done. Do you want what I have so far?
--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph. D.
Chair of Information Technology
D'Youville College
Buffalo, NY 14201
(716) 829-8197
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Fwd: OIN Notice - Definition Update [license@openinventionnetwork.com]
2013-07-12 16:32 ` Rich Felker
2013-07-12 17:00 ` Kurt H Maier
@ 2013-07-16 6:37 ` Rob Landley
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rob Landley @ 2013-07-16 6:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: musl; +Cc: musl
On 07/12/2013 11:32:15 AM, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 05:18:46PM +0100, Justin Cormack wrote:
> > On 12 Jul 2013 16:53, "Rich Felker" <dalias@aerifal.cx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 10:34:57AM -0400, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:32:27AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > > > > If you were looking for a list of packages to test musl
> against before
> > > > > 1.0, the Open Invention Network seems to have come up with a
> list of
> > > > > 593 packages they define as "The Linux System".
> > > >
> > > > This list looks like something a crazy person put together.
> It's
> > > > basically everything available in OpenSUSE plus the android
> SDK. There
> > > > is garbage in here like mono and mod_ruby.
> > >
> > > Indeed, this sounds like nothing but "Pointy Hair Linux"
> conformance,
> > > which I think we can do without. Trying to meet these
> requirements is
> > > akin to ISO C adding Annex K and other junk to make Microsoft
> happy.
> > > They knew there was no hope of Microsoft actually adopting the C
> > > standard, so why even bother trying to make them happy? Similarly,
> > > "Pointy Hair Linux" is not adopting musl anytime soon, so worrying
> > > about conforming to their silly requirements seems like a waste of
> > > time and energy...
> > >
> > > Rich
> >
> > Its not a standard, its a list of things that are broadly "Linux"
> in terms
> > of the point of the group which is an anti patent pool...
>
> OK, I think we may have all misunderstood the point of this list.
It's fairly crazy, and bigger than I realized.
My point was just that saying we support X packages from the Open
Invention Network's "Monster Fun System List" (even saying X% if X is
above 80) is a way to leverage their name in our eventual marketing
push. But if the list is too crazy, obviously it's not worth trying to
cover more than we would anyway.
Rob
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread