Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
2.6.11-rc5-nitro0: Fear And Loathing In intermodule.c
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Unsupported Software
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Tiger683
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 1347
Location: Heffner's House

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

u use the stable or experimental?
just in case, uname -r says 2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt for experimental
_________________
Retired gentoo user


Last edited by Tiger683 on Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chaosite
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 Dec 2003
Posts: 540
Location: Right over here.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darckness wrote:
joecool: Perhaps if you had read BOTH the npl AND the gpl, you wouldn't be acting so retardedly. The first item in the T&C for copying, distribution, and modification in the gpl states:
Quote:
1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program.


Sound familiar? It says that you must provide reference to the original creator. That's all the npl said. So really, the npl was just reiterating the gpl.

As for us not giving credit, I honestly had no idea who wrote the menuconfig/cflags patches. Now that I know, I can cite them appropriately.

And next time your sources rip off our documentation, I will be certain to post directly into your threads informing you so as opposed to letting it slide and attempting to settle it without directly calling attention to your project.


No dude, theres a huge difference. The GPL says that copyright information should be inside the source files. You say every user of the software must know it came from you.

Quote:
3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
must display the following acknowledgement:
This product includes software developed by the University of
California, Berkeley and its contributors.


Thats a line from the original BSD license, widely known as the "obnoxious advertising" clause. Its a bad idea, and heres why: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html

Now, "its still a free license!", you might say. However, its definatly different from the GPL, and the GPL does not allow you to make additional restrictions. So you were violating the GPL, dear.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tiger683
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 1347
Location: Heffner's House

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

First, dont call him dear, second, go somewhere else, flaming is over here!

T
_________________
Retired gentoo user
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
discomfitor
l33t
l33t


Joined: 21 Feb 2003
Posts: 927
Location: None

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chaosite: Thanks for clearing that up, hun.

From now on, I will no longer respond to any flame-oriented posts in this thread. I'm on jabber if you want to flame me.
_________________
There is no substitute for experience.
Imperfection indicates a lack of effort.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
_troll_
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 04 Feb 2004
Posts: 1971
Location: Warszawa, Poland

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darckness wrote:
_troll_: You are aptly named. Congratulations, for I am almost inspired enough by your insanity to respond to your trolling. Luckily I am not that stupid.

You have created and publish NPL - so you aren't wiser to... And don't blame me for laughing of 'NPL idea'.

Moreover - I've never said, that nitro-devs aren't spending lot of time on patchset. Or maybe I did? Plz - be so _briliant_ and show me where! ... ya... ?

And - with respect to my nickname - atleast it isn't misspelled :twisted:

Regards,
Przemek
_________________
Życie jest jak pudełko czekoladek....
Nigdy nie wiesz na co trafisz" by mother of Forrest Gump


Last edited by _troll_ on Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
joecool
n00b
n00b


Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:38 pm    Post subject: Re: 2.6.11-rc5-nitro0: Fear And Loathing In intermodule.c Reply with quote

Darckness wrote:
EDIT: Whoops...we screwed up. Ignore all references to npl. Next time I'll consult my attorney before attempting any sort of legal related document. Sticking to kernel-patching from now on...

Yeah, or learn howto read. :lol:

You do relize that what you just did however is an act of hostility towards other maintainers. Don't expect anything good about your patchset coming from me anymore. And I really don't care if you draw attention to or from my patchset, I'm not out there to be the most popular. I'm out there to fill a niche and make things work, not to be an attention whore.

As for me, you do relize that you violated the 1st term of the GPL also by not including all the names for all the writers of patches. So don't try to point the finger at me, because I haven't.

Man you guys are corrupt, its no wonder predatorfreak left.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pifactorial
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Oct 2004
Posts: 77
Location: 3<x<4 on the gamma function

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Allow me to summarize the situation, for any trolls or flamewarriors who are interested:

  1. Darckness and the devs put 100's of hours of work into their latest patchset
  2. They realize that some of their code has been stolen in the past, are annoyed, and want to stop this
  3. They draft a flawed license to ensure they get credit for the work they've done
  4. They realize the license is flawed, and graciously pretend like this whole ugly incident never happened
  5. They get flamed to death by dipwads who forgot to notice step 4

Any questions?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
predatorfreak
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 708
Location: USA, Michigan.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pifactorial wrote:
Allow me to summarize the situation, for any trolls or flamewarriors who are interested:

  1. Darckness and the devs put 100's of hours of work into their latest patchset
  2. They realize that some of their code has been stolen in the past, are annoyed, and want to stop this
  3. They draft a flawed license to ensure they get credit for the work they've done
  4. They realize the license is flawed, and graciously pretend like this whole ugly incident never happened
  5. They get flamed to death by dipwads who forgot to notice step 4

Any questions?


Pifactorial, before i goto bed, allow me to say this, darckness and tiger deverse a BEATING for ever thinking of NPL in the first place. I won't be the one to give the beating because i stand nutural, i understand what other developers feel about NPL and how darckness and tiger feel about there work getting tooken and no credit being givin, although I might not have the input i had before because i quit nitro, I believe NPL should be noted as one of the most flawed ideas ever.
_________________
System: predatorbox
Distro: Arch Linux x86_64
Current projects: blackhole, convmedia and anything else I cook up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
codergeek42
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 5142
Location: Anaheim, CA (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the quick summary, pifactorial. But please don't use the term "stolen code", as it makes others seem like thieves when in actually the GPL specifically _guarantees_ them the rights to incorporate that code into their own patchset. Using the phrase "stolen code" makes it seem as if they had no right to do so which is blatantly false. Thanks.
_________________
~~ Peter: Brony, GNU/Linux geek, caffeine addict, and Free Software advocate.
Who am I? :: EFF & FSF
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mirko_3
l33t
l33t


Joined: 02 Nov 2003
Posts: 605
Location: Birreria

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ehm... I sure feel dumb, but should I apply the patch against 2.6.10 or 2.6.11-rc5? I like to patch manually so that I can add my own stuff, but this time I'm baffled, as I get rejects with all versions I've tried to patch it against. Thanks
_________________
Non fa male! Non fa male!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
codergeek42
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 5142
Location: Anaheim, CA (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Predatorfreak: While I agree that the NPL they devised is a horrible method to do so, wanting credit for one's contributions is not inherently a bad thing. That's why the GPL tells you to add your own copyright information to any modifications you make and anyone else who uses that code cannot legally remove that copyright information. That is how you give credit where such credit is due.
_________________
~~ Peter: Brony, GNU/Linux geek, caffeine addict, and Free Software advocate.
Who am I? :: EFF & FSF
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
discomfitor
l33t
l33t


Joined: 21 Feb 2003
Posts: 927
Location: None

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mirko_3: they both apply on top of rc5.
_________________
There is no substitute for experience.
Imperfection indicates a lack of effort.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pifactorial
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Oct 2004
Posts: 77
Location: 3<x<4 on the gamma function

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

codergeek42 wrote:
But please don't use the term "stolen code"

You're right, that does sound very SCOesque - I was just trying to make a point. I think maybe there should be a stricter "code of honor" for kernel devs. So much of this fighting is childish and unnecessary.

:wink: Is the war over yet?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
a13x
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 215

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can't emerge the rt version:

Code:

Alex nitro-sources # emerge nitro-sources Calculating dependencies ...done!
>>> emerge (1 of 1) sys-kernel/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0 to /
QA Notice: USE Flag 'want-realtime' not in IUSE for sys-kernel/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0
>>> md5 src_uri ;-) patch-2.6.11-rc5.bz2
>>> md5 src_uri ;-) linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2
>>> md5 src_uri ;-) patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0.bz2


Exiting on signal 2
Alex nitro-sources #


WTF does it mean "not in IUSE" ? It's there alright and I have want-realtime in my make.conf:

Code:


# Copyright 1999-2004 Gentoo Foundation
# Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2
# $Header: $
if use want-realtime
then
UNIPATCH_LIST="${DISTDIR}/patch-${KV}-rt.bz2"
else
UNIPATCH_LIST="${DISTDIR}/patch-${KV}.bz2"
fi
K_PREPATCHED="yes"
UNIPATCH_STRICTORDER="yes"

K_NOUSENAME="yes"
ETYPE="sources"
inherit kernel-2 eutils
detect_version
IUSE="want-realtime"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
discomfitor
l33t
l33t


Joined: 21 Feb 2003
Posts: 927
Location: None

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

a13x: I flubbed the ebuild a tad. Try redownloading it.
_________________
There is no substitute for experience.
Imperfection indicates a lack of effort.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
codergeek42
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 5142
Location: Anaheim, CA (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pifactorial wrote:
:wink: Is the war over yet?
Not yet. I have one last comment. :oops:
pifactorial wrote:
I think maybe there should be a stricter "code of honor" for kernel devs. So much of this fighting is childish and unnecessary.
But there _is_ a code of honor. It's called the GNU General Public License. It says that you may legally and ethically use code from other software licensed under a GPL-compatible license within your own GPL'd software so long as the entire thing is GPL'd and you retain any and all contact/copyright information of the original author.
_________________
~~ Peter: Brony, GNU/Linux geek, caffeine addict, and Free Software advocate.
Who am I? :: EFF & FSF
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
borkdox
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 123

PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Getting back to the how this new nitro release works... Does Realtime makes a difference in speed and interactivity, or it is just called "realtime"?

I heard that it does not really improoves performance, from wikipedia::
Quote:
Note that this type of operating system does not necessarily have high throughput — the specialized scheduling algorithm and a high clock-interrupt rate can both interfere with throughput.
.

How is it working for the ones of you that are using it, or have compared with the non-realtime nitro?

I am going to compile this nitro tomorrow, no more time left today, and would like to get informed, thankx!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
discomfitor
l33t
l33t


Joined: 21 Feb 2003
Posts: 927
Location: None

PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

elocal: I've used both the stable and rt versions of this kernel and I must say that it FEELS faster with the rt. Tasks are much more responsive, and everything just seems to work BETTER. If you're worried about whether or not it will work (there's a very small chance that it might break on you even though I haven't had that problem), you're probably better off going with the stable. Both are excellent kernels.
_________________
There is no substitute for experience.
Imperfection indicates a lack of effort.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rmh3093
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 06 Aug 2003
Posts: 2138
Location: Albany, NY

PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i cant emerge the ebuld with rt either

* Applying patch-2.6.11-rc5.patch (-p0+) ... [ ok ] * Applying patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt.patch (-p0+) ...
patch: pch.c:621: intuit_diff_type: Assertion `i0 != NONE' failed. [ !! ] * Please attach /var/tmp/portage/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0/temp/patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt.err to any bug you may post.

!!! ERROR: sys-kernel/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0 failed.
!!! Function unipatch, Line 571, Exitcode 0
!!! Unable to dry-run patch.
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.
_________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rainmaker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 12 Feb 2004
Posts: 1650
Location: /home/NL/ehv/

PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

looks great!

thanks for the new patchset. One small thing though:

* FATAL: unable to locate:
* /usr/portage/distfiles/patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt.bz2
* for read-only. The file either has incorrect permissions
* or does not exist.

The ebuild doesn't download the rt patch automaticly. No biggy though

*edit: Ok, bigger then I thought:

* Applying patch-2.6.11-rc5.patch (-p0+) ... [ ok ] * Applying patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt.patch (-p0+) ...
patch: pch.c:621: intuit_diff_type: Assertion `i0 != NONE' failed. [ !! ] * Please attach /var/tmp/portage/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0/temp/patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt.err to any bug you may post.

!!! ERROR: sys-kernel/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0 failed.
!!! Function unipatch, Line 571, Exitcode 0
!!! Unable to dry-run patch.
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.

The log is too long to post, I'm afraid, but there are a lot of

No file to patch. Skipping patch.
5 out of 5 hunks ignored
can't find file to patch at input line 47773
Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
The text leading up to this was:

errors
I'll try to patch them manually

PS. what does the "symlink" use flag do?
_________________
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rainmaker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 12 Feb 2004
Posts: 1650
Location: /home/NL/ehv/

PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

patching manually doesn't work either :(

Code:
patch -p0 --dry-run < patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt
|diff -urN linux-2.6.11-rc5/Documentation/Changes linux-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt/Documentation/Changes
|--- linux-2.6.11-rc5/Documentation/Changes     2005-02-26 11:48:46.000000000 -0500
|+++ linux-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt/Documentation/Changes   2005-02-28 12:32:19.000000000 -0500
--------------------------
File to patch:


So I removed "linux-2.6.11-rc5/" and "linux-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt/" before the filenames in the patch

Code:
 patch -p0 --dry-run < patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt  (/usr/src/linux)
patching file Documentation/Changes
Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected!  Assume -R? [n]
Apply anyway? [n] y
Hunk #1 FAILED at 56.
Hunk #2 succeeded at 186 with fuzz 2 (offset 8 lines).
Hunk #3 succeeded at 365 with fuzz 2 (offset 12 lines).
1 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file Documentation/Changes.rej
patching file Documentation/DocBook/Makefile
Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected!  Assume -R? [n]


When using -f, a lot of failed hunks:
Code:
 patch -p0 --dry-run < patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt -f | grep -i fail | more
Hunk #1 FAILED at 56.
1 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file Documentation/Changes.rej
Hunk #1 FAILED at 93.
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file Documentation/DocBook/Makefile.rej
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file Documentation/DocBook/Makefilee.rej
Hunk #1 FAILED at 19.
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file Documentation/fb/00-INDEX.rej
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.


This goes on. To much for my xterm to save, so to much to post here :)
_________________
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rainmaker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 12 Feb 2004
Posts: 1650
Location: /home/NL/ehv/

PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

does this mean I can't use LUFS?

After compiling I get this:
Code:
if [ -r System.map ]; then /sbin/depmod -ae -F System.map  2.6.11-rc5-nitro0; fiWARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.11-rc5-nitro0/kernel/fs/lufs/lufs.ko needs unknown symbol kill_proc_info

_________________
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rmh3093
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 06 Aug 2003
Posts: 2138
Location: Albany, NY

PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

patching manually worked fine use -p1 not -p0



BUT framebuffer's broke, last normal line i saw in dmesg before it froze was vesafb: redraw or something like that

then i tried with out framebuffer and it crarashed right after reiser4 bitmap



so much for realtime
_________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Arainach
l33t
l33t


Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 609

PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I'm running solid on 2.6.11-rc5-nitro0 now. ATI's drivers work great, Teamspeak works great, Cedega works, ALSA works, vesafb-tng works perfectly... I'm very happy. Keep up the good work!
_________________
Gentoo: Stage3 w/ NPTL & udev, gcc 3.4.4 full rebuild
Kernel: 2.6.15-gentoo-r1 w/ 1G-Lowmem Patch
System: Athlon XP 2.2Ghz/1GB Corsair Value/160GB, 250GB WD IDE/128MB GeForce 6800/Sony 17" Trinitron G200 @ 1280x1024x75Hz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
super-lupo
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 29 Jun 2004
Posts: 92
Location: Germany / Berlin

PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

same error here:

Do you want me to merge these packages? [Yes/No]
>>> emerge (1 of 1) sys-kernel/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0 to /
>>> md5 src_uri ;-) patch-2.6.11-rc5.bz2
>>> md5 src_uri ;-) linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2
>>> md5 src_uri ;-) patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0.bz2
>>> Preparing to unpack ...
>>> Unpacking source...
>>> Unpacking linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2 to /var/tmp/portage/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0/work
* Applying patch-2.6.11-rc5.patch (-p0+) ... [ ok ]
* Applying patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt.patch (-p0+) ...
patch: pch.c:621: intuit_diff_type: Assertion `i0 != NONE' failed. [ !! ]
* Please attach /var/tmp/portage/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0/temp/patch-2.6.11-rc5-nitro0-rt.err to any bug you may post.

!!! ERROR: sys-kernel/nitro-sources-2.6.11_rc5-r0 failed.
!!! Function unipatch, Line 562, Exitcode 0
!!! Unable to dry-run patch.
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.


Greetings,
Lupo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Unsupported Software All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 2 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum