On Friday 26 September 2008 16:39:40 Michael Loeffler wrote:

On Friday 26 September 2008, Martin Lasarsch wrote:

...

On Friday 26 September 2008 16:09:58 Michael Loeffler wrote:

...

Here is our proposal for new discussion.

*Ship any media of openSUSE with open source software and proprietary software which allows redistribution (eg. firmware), for details [3].

*Add during installation automatically an online repo with the non-OSS stuff and install per default flashplayer (5MB) and the fluendo plug-in (210K) for mp3.

I generally like the proposal. But actually i would like to have a pop-up that "warns" the user before adding the non-OSS repo and installing the software. Some people might want to have a "clean" system, with a pop-up you can easily have that. I agree that many people don't care about the license, but some do.

Fully agreed. There needs to be an easy way not to install software you might not like. The expression "automatically" is missleading.

thanks for clarify this ... -- with kind regards, Martin Lasarsch, Core Services SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5 90409 Nürnberg GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) martin.lasarsch@suse.de - http://www.opensuse.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

H, or a add-on CD with the Non-OSS, leaving the DVD only with open software. Regards, Luiz F. R. 2008/9/26 Alexey Eremenko :

OSS PDF readers simply cannot read complex PDFs, where different pages have different sizes, etc... Many e-books use this PDF feature. Acrobat Reader is a must.

What is possible is to have 1 medias: 1 DVD for normal users and 1 DVD for Free Software geeks.

The 1 DVD for normal users should also have MPEG4/MP3 codecs preinstalled. Mandriva does that.

-- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov"

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 26 September 2008, Bryen wrote:

On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 12:30 -0300, ¡ElCheVive! wrote:

...

H,

or a add-on CD with the Non-OSS, leaving the DVD only with open software.

Regards,

Luiz F. R.

2008/9/26 Alexey Eremenko :

...

OSS PDF readers simply cannot read complex PDFs, where different pages have different sizes, etc... Many e-books use this PDF feature. Acrobat Reader is a must.

What is possible is to have 1 medias: 1 DVD for normal users and 1 DVD for Free Software geeks.

The 1 DVD for normal users should also have MPEG4/MP3 codecs preinstalled. Mandriva does that. Do they have for that piece an EULA which allows redistribtution?

-- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov"

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Just a friendly reminder to bottom-post, not top-post if you can. :-) Gets hard for us to jump up and down throughout the text.

Anyway, a separate CD sounds easier at first, but I fear it would cause much confusion. As I pointed out earlier, many users out there, particularly new users, don't fully grasp the concept of free software and proprietary software. THey just want something that works. They would possibly be frustrated with having to have two separate media to download and install. +1

On the other hand, those that do know and understand the distinction would react more favorably to having the option to not allow the installation of NON-OSS.

Let's not confuse new users and add more steps for them than is necessary. -- Bryen Yunashko Proud 2008 Candidate for openSUSE Board

-- Michael Löffler, Product Management Email: michl@suse.de Phone: +49 911 74053-376 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nürnberg - AG Nürnberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Friday 2008-09-26 at 17:26 +0200, Alexey Eremenko wrote:

OSS PDF readers simply cannot read complex PDFs, where different pages have different sizes, etc... Many e-books use this PDF feature. Acrobat Reader is a must.

True. Fact is, acroread has higher quality usually. Some documents are impossible without it. And Forms...

What is possible is to have 1 medias: 1 DVD for normal users and 1 DVD for Free Software geeks.

I agree. Or one for OSS, another add-on for NonOSS.

The 1 DVD for normal users should also have MPEG4/MP3 codecs preinstalled. Mandriva does that.

I think this might not be (legally) possible. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjdPhgACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XqOwCglxOT+tykjipZOIRR+ycIxGO2 IkoAoIfVcJCmPJAGXXPQr1OiIj1Lg84F =OU7J -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 26 September 2008 18:08:39 Andrew Joakimsen wrote:

...

per default flashplayer (5MB) and the fluendo plug-in (210K) for mp3. Why not libxine1?

openSUSE's libxine1 package doesn't provide MP3 support. Bye, Steve -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 26 September 2008 23:51:13 Andrew Joakimsen wrote:

...

...

Why not libxine1? openSUSE's libxine1 package doesn't provide MP3 support. openSUSE distributes "libxine" package. The "libxine1" package from

The xine package is called libxine1 in Factory and so will be in oS 11.1.

VLC or Packman repository does include support for "restricted formats."

Including this is out of question. Again, the thread is about REdistribution.

...

The Novell brands don't prevent redistribution. They only don't allow you to change the product to something totally different and still call it The license agreement states "THE SOFTWARE MAY NOT BE SOLD, TRANSFERRED OR FURTHER DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM NOVELL." My

That's from the devel version license, correct? You will not find that in the final version licenses - my point about Novell brands still stands. Bye, Steve -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 26 September 2008, Benji Weber wrote:

2008/9/26 Michael Loeffler :

...

This would allow us to offer a user friendly end user licence agreement (EULA) and would remove the cause of bad press and angry users reading the EULA really carefully.

Hypothetically if your proposal were accepted -

I really wonder whether we need a EULA at all, if the EULA is only restricting /redistribution/ then users should not have to agree to it in order to simply /use/ the software. Copyright and trademark law will already prevent people from redistributing in ways not allowed by the Licence, so what function does the EULA provide except annoying users and generating bad reviews? The EULA is not restricted to redistribution. Usage and warranty is covered here as well. M

-- Benjamin Weber

-- Michael Löffler, Product Management Email: michl@suse.de Phone: +49 911 74053-376 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nürnberg - AG Nürnberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 26 September 2008 21:27:25 Carlos E. R. wrote:

Possibly most of your user base have broadband, but many don't. I have

We are talking here about 5MB - that is IMHO not much even for small band. Argueable you're better without flash if you are not on broadband anyway.

friends in Spain that don't, for instance. And many of those users on modem will not fill surveys, either. I know of some that do not even have

Do you have any reason to believe that modem users have a higher usage of the big non-OSS stuff (AcroRead, MoneyPlex, AntiVir, ...) than broadband users?

I'd like to call attention to the real need of having all the files needed for installation on media, and point you to this link as an exxample of The Complete Multimedia Solution for Open Suse 11

Please don't mix things that are not redistributable and things (eg multimedia codecs) that are not free to use for other reasons. Bye, Steve -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 26 September 2008 22:21:08 Carlos E. R. wrote:

Where are you getting the 5Mb figure from? Could you expand?

The two by default installed packages from the online non-redistributale repo.

...

Do you have any reason to believe that modem users have a higher usage of the big non-OSS stuff (AcroRead, MoneyPlex, AntiVir, ...) than broadband They should have about the same use, but more problems to get them.

So if you don't dispute the survey then there is only a small percentage of people who *may* have a problem getting them. Bye, Steve -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Saturday 27 September 2008 05:37:03 pm Carlos E. R. wrote:

My point is that an online survey is biased when trying to learn conclusions about the Internet access of your entire user base.

So that is another question to include in the survey, so answers can be corelated to type of Internet access. -- Regards, Rajko -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Carlos E. R. a écrit :

You can not even consider conclusions about Internet access of the user base, when a proportion do not have Internet accesses and thus will not fill an online survey.

You can say that, "of those of our users with Internet access that answered, 90% has broadband". But you can not say "90% of our users have broadband".

There is a difference.

-- Cheers, Carlos E. R.

Well, i'd suggest to add a question (or some questions) treating this subject : for example "does the user have or not a regular web access" ... . Thus you can analyse the results properly ;-) Fabrice -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 2008-09-28 at 10:45 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:

Fabrice,

it is a bit better, but chance that someone without Internet access in house is using Linux on a PC is very small. Linux is born and lives on the net.

I mentioned that we were helping (in the Spanish list) a chap without any internet access and who is using opensuse. He only gets some email access on the work, shared. The exception in his country is that he has email, the rest have nothing. But yes, they do use linux. What they don't have are updates. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjfzbAACgkQtTMYHG2NR9X0MwCfRbFnDXYRzCaM9dhk4Eyyp/H9 EaoAnjgIr6qc5LQeDs64qbj36tF2nvUu =QPnk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 2008-09-28 at 16:05 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

"Carlos E. R." <> writes:

...

[...] (I understand from the discussion so far that, if no non-oss software is installed, that no eula needs to be displayed)

That's wrong - we still need an EULA for usage and warranty.

The main difference between the EULAs is redistribution rights, with some NON-OSS packages, we cannot grant redistribution ;(.

Ah. Well, ok. At least, write it up in plain English. For instance, if I copy the DVD from my ISO file, to give to friends, am I redistributing the DVD? - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjfzmoACgkQtTMYHG2NR9VdcwCeNjq4PX4AkhWbN2IiJzuJ5Tin aOgAn0ck1dkTz9dh9YEBw7PnZkAo2xLS =gj0+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 2008-09-29 at 10:41 +0200, Michael Loeffler wrote:

...

At least, write it up in plain English.

For instance, if I copy the DVD from my ISO file, to give to friends, am I redistributing the DVD? Yes, you do.

Argh. Then, what is the correct procedure? They download it and burn it on their own? (Not good... some do not have internet. Some just want to try, will not endure the work of downloading and burning, so they ask "please give me a copy". Its Linux, so its free. ) - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjgrJQACgkQtTMYHG2NR9VR6QCgh0UyDLQtuwX143FJpZ6dJwi6 ZvkAoIQ8UE3AyjV8KT7VWHS6QORhQusU =5Hlz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 2008-09-29 at 12:39 +0200, Michael Loeffler wrote:

...

...

...

For instance, if I copy the DVD from my ISO file, to give to friends, am I redistributing the DVD?

Yes, you do.

Argh.

Then, what is the correct procedure? They download it and burn it on their own? Today the 100% correct procedure is to download and copy the 1CD version as it allows redistribution. And that's why we'd like change the DVD slightly to allow exactly the redistribution for everyone.

Ok, that's the future. What is the correct procedure for the 11.0 DVD? (not CD). Are you saying that we are using the DVD illegally? There must be a correct procedure for the current DVD. Even if it is academic, but I'm curious :-)

We never had any of the software vendors going after somebody as all of them want to have their software in as many hands as possible (e.g. acroread) but for an user it would be good having a) an easy to read and understandable EULA and b) an EULA allowing redistribution.

Not only easy to read, but useful. It is useless to forbid redistribution, because we (ie, Joe User) will do it. What about a club giving away hundreds of copies of Linux on a festival or a school? Or a friend giving a copy to another friend? No way. Linux users perceive Linux as free, so they will not restrict themselves by any EULA a company like XYZ may impose on it. Except if the restriction is felt as reasonable (like not saying this is WYZ's distro, when it has a logo from XYZ). - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjg8B8ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9Vz8QCcC/TXQSr+pF3mogob8WAunc/K 9E4AoI4u8gwaP3q4A2R85x13Q63WToKZ =f9Rv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 2008-09-29 at 11:16 -0400, Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier wrote:

On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

Not only easy to read, but useful. It is useless to forbid redistribution, because we (ie, Joe User) will do it. What about a club giving away hundreds of copies of Linux on a festival or a school? Or a friend giving a copy to another friend? No way. Linux users perceive Linux as free, so they will not restrict themselves by any EULA a company like XYZ may impose on it. Except if the restriction is felt as reasonable (like not saying this is WYZ's distro, when it has a logo from XYZ).

This is not only academic, nor aimed only at "Joe User" -- if we don't have a EULA that easily allows redistribution, we have to make special cases for publishers of books and magazines, and other entities that *do* care about this license.

The odds of Adobe or anyone like that suing me for downloading a copy and giving it to, say, a friend that works for Mozilla, is negligible. The odds of Adobe suing a publisher for distributing openSUSE with a magazine or book are also small, but not one that some publishers care to take.

Ok, ok. Maybe in the USA. Dunno. I believe an English Eula is not enforceable here. IANAL, etc. The question remains unanswered: what is the correct procedure to use the openSUSE DVD, as it is currently in the servers? It seems that it is not legal for Joe User (risk negligible) to burn the DVD from the ISO image to a friend. How then should we, er... expand Linux usage if we can not give copies to friends? Or in magazines? I don't understand. Has this been discovered now? Yes, yes, things will be changed for the future. But now? Am I committing crimes every time I make a copy for a friend? Perhaps I should tell them to use... no, no, I'm not that bad guy >:-p Absurd! - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjhG6UACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XfQACeKSz0O1ExmIvheOttv0XKgGUb hCAAniQ9eS5BYy9MxpOVdx8xuu2KI9Rt =Qcgl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Hi, On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, Stephan Binner wrote:

On Friday 26 September 2008 22:00:39 Alberto Passalacqua wrote:

...

the major complaint is related to the point of the EULA concerning openSUSE redistribution due to the presence of Novell brands.

The Novell brands don't prevent redistribution. They only don't allow you to change the product to something totally different and still call it openSUSE.

...

key point of openSUSE: offering also proprietary software ready to go on DVD

I don't see this key point. I doubt someone is choosing openSUSE because of that - there are (community) distribution out there who include much more proprietary and other problematic stuff like encrypted DVD, all codecs, ...

...

If it is really necessary, a warning pop-up and a checkbox during the installation process to deselect automatically all the non-OSS software

This thread is IMO about being allowed to redistribute the media (complete DVD with all software), not about EULA of single applications you have to agree when installing/using (like [until recently] when starting Mozilla Firefox).

I would count it as a big advantage if we could sort things in a manner that the EULA could explicite state: It is allowed to copy these media and give them to friends, as long as you do it for no fee regarding the contents. Viele Grüße Eberhard Mönkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Friday 2008-09-26 at 16:48 -0500, Alberto Passalacqua wrote: ...

...

This thread is IMO about being allowed to redistribute the media (complete DVD with all software), not about EULA of single applications you have to agree when installing/using (like [until recently] when starting Mozilla Firefox).

OK. So there is a contraddiction. I assume the goal of having an easy redistributable DVD is to make it easy to spread openSUSE. I don't buy the story of mirrors having problems, because they mirror exactly the same distributions that offer practically everything restricted.

So we want the media easier to be redistributed (as if now someone doesn't do that already...they even sell it online) on one hand to reach more people, but on the other hand we increase the difficulty for newcomers to have what in previous releases was there.

I have to confess I don't understand legalesse, specially EULAs. So I also have to confess that, although I started to read the Novell EULA on every install, I did not finish: too complicated for me. I'm even tried again, as I write this; there is a '/mnt/dvd/EULA.txt' here. Bufff! In this case, I don't understand why I can download openSUSE and burn it, several copies, I assume, but I can not make a copy of the burned DVD for friends. Is it what it means non redistributable? I must be real thick :-) - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjdYUIACgkQtTMYHG2NR9UNjQCggqMylWqWSiyJGHNCGB37i6sq 31MAnjUFlCqW5rthZrueLr0QvZwVcSrS =DDYU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Saturday 2008-09-27 at 09:42 +0200, Stephan Binner wrote:

On Saturday 27 September 2008 00:25:03 Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

In this case, I don't understand why I can download openSUSE and burn it, several copies, I assume, but I can not make a copy of the burned DVD for friends. Is it what it means non redistributable? I must be real thick :-)

Your use case is what is meant with *re*distributable. There are a few (maybe 3 to 5 of several thousand) packages on DVD like Adobe stuff and MP3 decoder that are not allowed to be redistributed and hence strictly adhered do not allow *you, mirrors or merchants* to make copies of the DVD.

Sorry, I still don't understand. I know I'm thick, but clarifying this will benefit many out there, I hope :-) You mean that, if Adobe stuff is included in the DVD I can not make several copies from the ISO image and give it to friends? That I have to download it as many times as copies I make? Or that each person has to download his copy? Or that I can not make copies of the already burned DVD that somebody else gave me? Or simply that I can not charge for it? You could consider re-writing the EULA with a FAQ so that people understand it. I don't. Not you personally, I mean, but the lawyers at your company. (I remember the original Borland license in the eighties... it was really easy to understand what we could or could not do.). - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjet9kACgkQtTMYHG2NR9WxbQCffwuH0sx7X7Z5uVTCcbKyX4KX 25QAn0ka/BN/ZNn9UbbMzbpKIGXzwMY9 =a2/F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday 2008-09-27 at 21:28 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:

...

...

Your use case is what is meant with *re*distributable. There are a few (maybe 3 to 5 of several thousand) packages on DVD like Adobe stuff and MP3 decoder that are not allowed to be redistributed and hence strictly adhered do not allow *you, mirrors or merchants* to make copies of the DVD.

From EULA

You may make and use unlimited copies of the Software for Your distribution and use within Your Organization.

Yes, but it continues: ] With respect to any version containing the letters "OSS" in ] the product name (with the exception of those versions containing the ] letters "NON-OSS" in their product names), whereby the product name is ] defined in the file "content" in the uppermost directory of the product, by now I'm lost again, with so many "name" and exceptions and wherebys. Why do I have to look if the letters OSS or non-oss are in so many places? Just tell me straight away what I can do with this whole dvd I have in my hands. In clear English words not written in legalese. My first language is not English.

You may make and distribute unlimited copies of the Software outside Your organization provided that: 1) You receive no consideration [1]; and, 2) you do not bundle or combine the Software with another offering (e.g., software, hardware, or service).

This paragraph is not in my DVD. I have: ] ... in the uppermost directory of the product, You may make and ] distribute unlimited copies of the Software outside Your organization. ] You may make and distribute unlimited modified copies outside Your ] organization provided You remove all Novell trademarks, trade dress, What on earth trade dress? No, I'm not going to use a dictionary. Assume I'm installing and thus, no browser is running. ] and logos from each modified copy of the Software. The term ] "Organization" means a legal entity, excluding subsidiaries and ] affiliates with a separate existence for tax purposes or for legal ] personality purposes. An example of an Organization in the private ] sector would be a corporation, partnership, or trust, excluding any ] subsidiaries or affiliates of the organization with a separate tax ] identification number or company registration number. In the public ] sector, an example of Organization would be a specific government body ] or local government authority. They lost me.

...

You could consider re-writing the EULA with a FAQ so that people understand it. I don't. Not you personally, I mean, but the lawyers at your company.

(I remember the original Borland license in the eighties... it was really easy to understand what we could or could not do.).

Once upon a time there was a world where everyone could understand contracts.

Yagh. Very true. Software was young then.

Actually in that world software was modular and you would be able to take it apart and assemble the way you want, replacing original parts with performance components from aftermarket.

Assembling... hear, this is in my EULA of my 11.0 DVD: ] Novell reserves all rights not expressly granted to You. You may not: ] (1) reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software except and ] only to the extent it is expressly permitted by applicable law or the ] license terms accompanying a component of the Software; or (2) transfer ] the Software or Your license rights under this Agreement, in whole or in ] part. Wasn't this open source and free? Why can't I decompile? Maybe because I have the source code :-? I'm lost.

[1] WordNet: consideration 5: a fee charged in advance to retain the services of someone [syn: {retainer}]

I'm Spanish. I have a fairly good knowledge of English, I think. But that meaning of "consideration" is new for me, I learnt of it on these lists a year ago or so when discussing the Eula. In fact, I can say that the EULA is completely void if not written in my language (Spanish) and is read and signed before buying, as any contract. I can act in good faith and try to read the Eula, but I will certainly abandon reading as soon as I find legalese terms I don't understand. And of course, many will not even try to read it and just click continue. That text may be fine for lawyers, but I'm a private person with limited assets and I can't hire a lawyer to explain it to me - provided I can find one that reads English legalese! - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjffMcACgkQtTMYHG2NR9UDzgCgiEackbPPg88CAOInnqVt2E83 w1IAn0h1T99BZRybjBoU/wBVprJ6nkAr =q72A -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sunday 28 September 2008, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On Saturday 2008-09-27 at 21:28 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:

...

...

...

Your use case is what is meant with *re*distributable. There are a few (maybe 3 to 5 of several thousand) packages on DVD like Adobe stuff and MP3 decoder that are not allowed to be redistributed and hence strictly adhered do not allow *you, mirrors or merchants* to make copies of the DVD.

From EULA

You may make and use unlimited copies of the Software for Your distribution and use within Your Organization.

Yes, but it continues:

] With respect to any version containing the letters "OSS" in ] the product name (with the exception of those versions containing the ] letters "NON-OSS" in their product names), whereby the product name is ] defined in the file "content" in the uppermost directory of the product,

by now I'm lost again, with so many "name" and exceptions and wherebys. And that is exactly is one main goal - getting the EULA understandable and much easier to read as we mostly dealing with users with limited legal back round. M

Why do I have to look if the letters OSS or non-oss are in so many places? Just tell me straight away what I can do with this whole dvd I have in my hands. In clear English words not written in legalese. My first language is not English.

...

You may make and distribute unlimited copies of the Software outside Your organization provided that: 1) You receive no consideration [1]; and, 2) you do not bundle or combine the Software with another offering (e.g., software, hardware, or service).

This paragraph is not in my DVD.

I have:

] ... in the uppermost directory of the product, You may make and ] distribute unlimited copies of the Software outside Your organization. ] You may make and distribute unlimited modified copies outside Your ] organization provided You remove all Novell trademarks, trade dress,

What on earth trade dress? No, I'm not going to use a dictionary. Assume I'm installing and thus, no browser is running.

] and logos from each modified copy of the Software. The term ] "Organization" means a legal entity, excluding subsidiaries and ] affiliates with a separate existence for tax purposes or for legal ] personality purposes. An example of an Organization in the private ] sector would be a corporation, partnership, or trust, excluding any ] subsidiaries or affiliates of the organization with a separate tax ] identification number or company registration number. In the public ] sector, an example of Organization would be a specific government body ] or local government authority.

They lost me.

...

...

You could consider re-writing the EULA with a FAQ so that people understand it. I don't. Not you personally, I mean, but the lawyers at your company.

(I remember the original Borland license in the eighties... it was really easy to understand what we could or could not do.).

Once upon a time there was a world where everyone could understand contracts.

Yagh. Very true. Software was young then.

...

Actually in that world software was modular and you would be able to take it apart and assemble the way you want, replacing original parts with performance components from aftermarket.

Assembling... hear, this is in my EULA of my 11.0 DVD:

] Novell reserves all rights not expressly granted to You. You may not: ] (1) reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software except and ] only to the extent it is expressly permitted by applicable law or the ] license terms accompanying a component of the Software; or (2) transfer ] the Software or Your license rights under this Agreement, in whole or in ] part.

Wasn't this open source and free? Why can't I decompile? Maybe because I have the source code :-?

I'm lost.

...

[1] WordNet: consideration 5: a fee charged in advance to retain the services of someone [syn: {retainer}]

I'm Spanish. I have a fairly good knowledge of English, I think. But that meaning of "consideration" is new for me, I learnt of it on these lists a year ago or so when discussing the Eula. In fact, I can say that the EULA is completely void if not written in my language (Spanish) and is read and signed before buying, as any contract.

I can act in good faith and try to read the Eula, but I will certainly abandon reading as soon as I find legalese terms I don't understand. And of course, many will not even try to read it and just click continue.

That text may be fine for lawyers, but I'm a private person with limited assets and I can't hire a lawyer to explain it to me - provided I can find one that reads English legalese!

-- Cheers, Carlos E. R.

-- Michael Löffler, Product Management SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nürnberg - AG Nürnberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Monday 29 September 2008, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On Monday 2008-09-29 at 10:38 +0200, Michael Loeffler wrote:

...

...

by now I'm lost again, with so many "name" and exceptions and wherebys.

And that is exactly is one main goal - getting the EULA understandable and much easier to read as we mostly dealing with users with limited legal back round.

Agreed.

Then, IMO, the best alternative is to move those packages away, but both to the online repo (as proposed) and to an extra, add-on, CD for those that don't have easy Internet or no network during the install. What's the benefit of an non-OSS add-on CD when having no or low bandwith internet? BTW: the non-oss online repo anyway would stay as it is today.

M

-- Cheers, Carlos E. R.

-- Michael Löffler, Product Management SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nürnberg - AG Nürnberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Michael Loeffler wrote:

What's the benefit of an non-OSS add-on CD when having no or low bandwith internet?

The benefit is someone with a high-bandwidth connection can download and burn it and hand it together with the DVD to that guy with low bandwidth connection. Not sure what the legal implication os this is but it's quite standard practice for many people (or even download and burn it on e.g. university and go home and install the whole stuff on your low-bandwidth home computer). Robert Kaiser -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:38 AM, Michael Loeffler wrote:

And that is exactly is one main goal - getting the EULA understandable and much easier to read as we mostly dealing with users with limited legal back round.

The problem with most EULA is that they are really one sided. That and the fact that most people, myself included, never read them and just click ok. If I need to install and use that useless flashplayer because my son wants to watch youtube, then I just install it and ignore the EULA. Most EULAs are only there to protect the company and not the consumer. That's why so many of them have been struck down because in order to use a product or service, you have no choice except accepting it. So, if your gov't requires a specific program for you to do something, then you don't really have any choice. I started with SuSE 5.3 and purchased several versions up through 9.x. I never even knew I wasn't supposed to give out copies of the cds until one of the guys at the LUG told me about that restriction. So, I guess I'm a criminal because I didn't take the time to read it. Oh well. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

I don't think so, please read the linked LWN story. It was about the *license of a development release* including things like "prohibits redistribution for compensation and use in a production environment".

OK.

...

I don't buy the story of mirrors having problems, because they mirror exactly the same distributions that offer practically everything restricted.

So we want the media easier to be redistributed (as if now someone doesn't do that already...they even sell it online) on one hand to reach

Some mirrors and merchants violating current licenses is no reason that should make us stop to simplify our license. :-)

Technically all the mirrors hosting the DVD are violating it, strictly speaking. And I don't see how this will be solved with a non-OSS repository. The current configuration of non-OSS repositories won't change anything for mirrors, for example. So does Novell plan to split the non-OSS repository in two, one with the redistributable part on the usual mirrors, and another one with the non-redistributable packages? And where would this be hosted? Regards, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Hi Peter,

Could you please elaborate what exactly you mean with "our redirector fails ... quite dramatically at every release"?

I would be very interested in details.

I'm sorry for my delayed answer. I have noticed your question only now. My point about the redirector is quite simple. Since when it was introduced, it had problems, especially under high load, which means immediately after a new openSUSE release. How this is related to this discussion? Again, it is simple. When 11.0 was released, it was impossible to access to the download site and the automatically added repositories were not working because the redirector was overloaded and timing out the connection. As a consequence, moving the non-OSS software mentioned in this thread to a non-OSS repository and asking the user if he wants to add it at installation time will lead to the following problem: a lot of people will download openSUSE 11.1, will install it and due to the overload it won't be able to use the repository at the time of installation. The consequence of this will be a lot of complaints, and potentially of some "bad press", which is what seems to worry Novell more. I hope I clarified. With kind regards, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Hi Peter,

The machine was never under high load during openSUSE release. It had a remarkably low load during peak times, less than 1.0 accounting for Apache and 1.something accounting for other services running on the machine (mostly rsync, but rsync is mostly busy before release, not after. Once we have released, everything is already synced.).

Do you maybe interpret something else as an assumed load problem? It seems an assumption of yours.

I interpret as overload a timeout while connecting to download.opensuse.org, and I thought to overload because it happened exactly during the release days. We had some complaint on IRC I can remember of.

Is it possible that you were sent to a *mirror* which was overloaded?

I don't know. I remember I could not install patches or add installations sources because the URL could not be found.

Against overloaded mirrors, there are two things that can be done: 1) when downloading an ISO image, use a metalink client. download.opensuse.org will give it the list of best mirrors and the metalink client will automatically cope with failing mirrors. 2) for zypp/YaST, there is early support for metalinks as well, which would help for the download of repository metadata and packages (which this discussion refers to).

That's my point. Adding a "download.opensuse.org" was not possible immediately after there release. I still remember I could not install patches for that reason.

I *do* see, understand and appreciate your point though, because the situation you describe does transfer to the situation of failing mirrors; for the end user it doesn't make a difference if the redirector fails or the mirror that it is sent to. So your point of adding online stuff at install time is valid of course. However I see possibilities to alleviate this (see above). For 11.1, we won't have this, and in any case we need to be careful to implement online accesses in a way that they don't block anything, can be delayed and fail gracefully.

I have no doubts there are a lot of possibilities to reduce the problem. My main message was that I don't think we need this at all, because the current situation makes a very limited number of users unhappy, and satisfy a lot more users. I don't think we should listen to "bad press" for every detail. OpenSUSE, as any other big distribution, will always receive "bad press". To conclude, I would leave non-oss software at least on the DVD, maybe removing it from the online repositories so that mirrors won't have to worry about it. Regards, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 2008-10-01 at 00:24 +0200, Peter Poeml wrote:

Hi Alberto,

On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 04:14:57PM -0500, Alberto Passalacqua wrote:

[ did/does the redirector fail on release date? ] I should comment that there is a feeling that the redirector fails after the opensuse release. A feeling, because of comments of people having problems, and the usual solution we give is to try specifying a fixed mirror instead. It is a feeling, no hard data. We don't have that. For myself, I never install during the week of the release. I always upgrade, I don't usually install fresh, so I prefer to wait and read the problems others have ;-) But, a redirector failure during an upgrade can be more dangerous than for other people, because we always have more packages than those provided on the DVD. It's one more reason I strongly dislike not having the non-oss software on the same dvd or on an extra cd. I even would prefer a double dvd distro :-p

However: I actually remember now, while browsing the logs of the time, that our mirror surveillance had a bug during 11.0 release time :-( which caused failing mirrors to go unnoticed for a few days. A bug that was already fixed, sneaked back in by updating a package from the buildservice, that still hadn't been rebuilt after a day :(

This might be the cause of what you have been seeing.

Such a bug hits harder when there is exactly one mirror in a country.

Anyway, this rather proves your point about online accessess during installation. There will always be something wrong, in a complex system of dozens of mirrors.

True.

This is exactly why I mandate download failover for libzypp: See http://en.opensuse.org/Libzypp/Failover

Cute! I haven't read it complete (I stopped when it looked to technical for night reading ;-) ), but looks very interesting. This is working now?

My point is that we need to deal with this kind of problem *not only* during install time. The problem is largely the same when anyone wants to update their running system. However, a failure during install time is clearly more fatal.

Absolutely. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjiwhUACgkQtTMYHG2NR9UnRgCdHL3sMPSBU84RqHXE4kcUpjMu ctYAn1o8PhuoiM5UFtVI23f5TL6X4OFg =6k64 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 2008-10-01 at 14:32 +0200, Peter Poeml wrote:

Hi Carlos,

On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 02:19:29AM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

[ did/does the redirector fail on release date? ]

I should comment that there is a feeling that the redirector fails after the opensuse release. A feeling, because of comments of people having

We know that it didn't fail, but we do know that mirrors fail.

That you got the impression is caused by the intransparency of the process. I just created a feature request to improve on this: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305320

Ah! You propose that the actual mirror is displayed. Very good, that is needed.

...

problems, and the usual solution we give is to try specifying a fixed mirror instead.

Much better would be to tell us about problems with failing mirrors. This is best done by contacting ftpadmin at suse dot de.

But at the moment it is almost impossible to know what mirror we are using if redirected.

...

It is a feeling, no hard data. We don't have that.

For myself, I never install during the week of the release. I always upgrade, I don't usually install fresh, so I prefer to wait and read the problems others have ;-)

I did installs during the release days myself :-)

But not upgrades ;-)

Worked fine, with the exception that one German mirror had (firewall) connection issues that lead to connection hangs which wasn't exactly easy to debug, which is why I created the above mentioned feature request.

Yes, it always bothers me when I find that nobody else is able to notify me about problems (that hit nearly everybody in Germany), and they are not reported or solved until I run into them myself. Therefore, we need to make this more transparent, to enable users to report problems.

Absolutely. That would help a lot. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjjdX8ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9VW8ACcChTC8EF+qDJsPqfppfKH3awm C3EAnAlquSk8YTI/+IbGUSKP7SdIjMdz =8aAz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 2008-10-01 at 15:19 +0200, Peter Poeml wrote:

...

...

I did installs during the release days myself :-)

But not upgrades ;-)

Oh, I am a notorious upgrader. Installations really are the exception :-)

And you do upgrades near the relese date? Wow, that's daring :-) I use a quiet night or day. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjjfqMACgkQtTMYHG2NR9WolwCghfg2YGE4Nm5N4YSSwXt60sHP vGcAnjUH2qgwJxu0uhKH/cc/sh+rMisO =bZ9O -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 06:45:37PM -0500, Rajko M. wrote:

On Wednesday 01 October 2008 08:05:02 am Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

But at the moment it is almost impossible to know what mirror we are using if redirected.

We are always redirected ;-)

Not always. Altogether, about 50% of requests are redirected. The reason is that certain files are delivered directly either for security reasons, or because of high fluctuation which makes it impossible to have the files up to date on mirrors in time. In particular, the /update tree and Factory come with some exceptions. Files that can safely be taken from mirrors (and for which we can guarantee that the client gets to see a consistent picture) are redirected. There is also a number of files that is too small to be worth the introduced extra latency of a redirect. If a file isn't really larger than the server reply that would indicate the redirect, we just return the file itself.

The information about used mirror should be in y2log. I recall that I have seen some, though, I have to look again to find where.

Unfortunately, the information is invisible there because nobody looks there, and in retrospective it doesn't help in most cases anyway. Just look at the complaints about "the redirector". The useful reports that pointed out a problem which can only be seen by analyzing the y2log I can count on one hand. Peter -- Contact: admin@opensuse.org (a.k.a. ftpadmin@suse.com) #opensuse-mirrors on freenode.net Info: http://en.opensuse.org/Mirror_Infrastructure SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development

On Thursday 02 October 2008 04:26:07 am Carlos E. R. wrote:

On Wednesday 2008-10-01 at 18:45 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:

...

On Wednesday 01 October 2008 08:05:02 am Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

But at the moment it is almost impossible to know what mirror we are using if redirected.

We are always redirected ;-)

It appears not :-)

Who would expect so much sophistication from redirector. Author is only doctor ;-) Mea culpa. I should suspect that it is not plain solution.

...

The information about used mirror should be in y2log.

Not too practical.

No, during system installation it is absolutely not a solution, but we talk about catching slow mirrors, where 'tail' and 'grep' would be handy later on installed system. On the other hand now it will be implemented to see real file server.

When we have a problem, what we see in the display is the redirector, not the mirror, so we blame the redirector.

Yeah. When you feel that someone is pulling wallet out of you pocket you catch first that you see in that direction. -- Regards, Rajko -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Peter Poeml wrote:

On a related note, I have been working with someone from the US during the last days to gather data on performance of individual mirrors, and I actually disabled 4 US mirrors today, which means that the remaining ones should give a much better service to you. Yes, the mirror situation in the US isn't very good.

What would it take to become a mirror? How fast of a connection would be needed? What type of hardware? Is there a page on this? Thanx -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

You may want to look at mirrors.xmission.com I have been using them a lot. It says i386 only but they have had everything. I think they have the bandwidth that may really assist us. -- Boyd Gerber ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Friday 2008-09-26 at 22:17 +0200, Stephan Binner wrote:

On Friday 26 September 2008 22:00:39 Alberto Passalacqua wrote:

...

the major complaint is related to the point of the EULA concerning openSUSE redistribution due to the presence of Novell brands.

The Novell brands don't prevent redistribution. They only don't allow you to change the product to something totally different and still call it openSUSE.

As a matter of fact, it is the Novell related EULA the only one that has made me and others rise an eyebrow. >:-) I take for granted the Adobe EULA, but your's too?

...

key point of openSUSE: offering also proprietary software ready to go on DVD

I don't see this key point. I doubt someone is choosing openSUSE because of that - there are (community) distribution out there who include much more proprietary and other problematic stuff like encrypted DVD, all codecs, ...

But it is true. One of the important points for selecting SuSE, later openSUSE, has always been that some interesting proprietary software was included.

...

If it is really necessary, a warning pop-up and a checkbox during the installation process to deselect automatically all the non-OSS software

This thread is IMO about being allowed to redistribute the media (complete DVD with all software), not about EULA of single applications you have to agree when installing/using (like [until recently] when starting Mozilla Firefox).

Well, the objections of others to the EULA has been stated by the original poster as a reason for this proposal: ML> This would allow us to offer a user friendly end user licence ML> agreement (EULA) and would remove the cause of bad press and angry ML> users reading the EULA really carefully. It is not the EULAs of single applications the "problem". It is yours ;-p - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjdWf4ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9VLCQCdE+B66PPY/ZMHtiZOioX96FXz vhAAnim5FbL8YHFEmLphqCSCXjKN8D27 =Idw3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

The Friday 2008-09-26 at 15:00 -0500, Alberto Passalacqua wrote:

...

...

If it is really necessary, a warning pop-up and a checkbox during the installation process to deselect automatically all the non-OSS software seems enough to me.

+1

With the side effect, IMO, of disabling the eula in that case. If a single package that doesn't allows redistribution (Flash?) is

2008/9/26 Carlos E. R. : physically available in the DVD you can't redistribute the whole DVD. You can NOT copy it to your friends. No matter if the package is installed by default or not, or if there is any pop-up. This is the problematic part of the actual EULA from my DVD: "You may make and use unlimited copies of the Software within your Organization. With respect to any version containing the letters "OSS" in the product name (with the exception of those versions containing the letters "NON-OSS" in their product names), whereby the product name is defined in the file "content" in the uppermost directory of the product, You may make and distribute unlimited copies of the Software outside Your organization." So the original plan submitted by Michael Loeffler looks fine to me. It solves the BIG, real problem of the redistribution. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 23:37 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

My propossal too.

- There is one disk with only oss software, so it is redistributable. - There is another disk (add-on disk) with only non-oss softwre, so it is not redistributable.

-- Cheers, Carlos E. R.

That's only good for those of us who are aware and know to get the second media. Meanwhile, go over to the #suse irc channel and witness that there is so much confusion amongst newcomers about what they need to add in order to make things work, i.e., graphics drivers, codecs, etc. Now they also need to get a second medium? No, I'm not in favor of increasing the hurdles new users have to jump over in order to try out openSUSE. -- Bryen Yunashko Proud 2008 Candidate for openSUSE Board -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

2008/9/26 Carlos E. R. :

My propossal too.

- - There is one disk with only oss software, so it is redistributable. - - There is another disk (add-on disk) with only non-oss softwre, so it is not redistributable.

I'm not against a non-oss add-on CD. But note that right now the DVD doesn't includes the full non-oss repo. So if the non-oss is removed from the DVD what we lose is only: $ du -hc `smart query --show-channels '*' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?opensuse-dvd(,.*)?\]' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?repo-non-oss(,.*)?\]' | sed 's/@\(i586\|i686\|x86_64\|noarch\).*/.\1.rpm/' | fgrep x86_64` 250K gst-fluendo-mp3-2-72.1.x86_64.rpm 106K ivtv-firmware-1.0.3-66.1.x86_64.rpm 22M java-1_6_0-sun-1.6.0.u6-8.1.x86_64.rpm 40K java-1_6_0-sun-alsa-1.6.0.u6-8.1.x86_64.rpm 7,1M java-1_6_0-sun-devel-1.6.0.u6-8.1.x86_64.rpm 32K java-1_6_0-sun-jdbc-1.6.0.u6-8.1.x86_64.rpm 296K pico-1.10-11.1.x86_64.rpm 17K unace-1.2b-745.1.x86_64.rpm 1,6M xv-3.10a-1228.1.x86_64.rpm 32M total $ du -hc `smart query --show-channels '*' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?opensuse-dvd(,.*)?\]' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?repo-non-oss(,.*)?\]' | sed 's/@\(i586\|i686\|x86_64\|noarch\).*/.\1.rpm/' | fgrep i586` 4,4M RealPlayer-10.0.9-51.1.i586.rpm 38M acroread-8.1.2-34.1.i586.rpm 4,8M flash-player-9.0.124.0-10.1.i586.rpm 946K iscan-2.10.0.1-21.1.i586.rpm 564K iscan-proprietary-drivers-2.10.0.1-10.1.i586.rpm 16M moneyplex-2008-2.1.i586.rpm 6,2M opera-9.27-15.1.i586.rpm 70M total $ du -hc `smart query --show-channels '*' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?opensuse-dvd(,.*)?\]' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?repo-non-oss(,.*)?\]' | sed 's/@\(i586\|i686\|x86_64\|noarch\).*/.\1.rpm/' | fgrep noarch` 3,2M AdobeICCProfiles-2.0-111.1.noarch.rpm 2,4M IPAGothic-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 3,1M IPAMincho-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 2,4M IPAPGothic-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 3,1M IPAPMincho-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 2,4M IPAUIGothic-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 21K adaptec-firmware-1.32-16.1.noarch.rpm 15K ant-javamail-1.7.0-132.1.noarch.rpm 155K atmel-firmware-1.3-113.1.noarch.rpm 315K ipw-firmware-8-82.1.noarch.rpm 126K iscan-firmware-2.8.0.1-48.1.noarch.rpm 62K iwl3945-ucode-2.14.1.5-50.1.noarch.rpm 75K iwl4965-ucode-4.44.1.20-11.1.noarch.rpm 220K javamail-1.4-190.1.noarch.rpm 247K javamail-monolithic-1.4-190.1.noarch.rpm 238K qlogic-firmware-1.0-121.1.noarch.rpm 18M total Remove Java from the list (OpenJDK), and the firmwares that will be still in the DVD (and add packages not available in the online repo: agfa-fonts...). The only "big" (>5MB) files are acroread, moneyplex and opera. I'm sure acroread is needed in some cases... but I never found one. No idea what moneyplex is. And an user can live with Firefox instead of Opera. I don't really see a big lose. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Il giorno sab, 27/09/2008 alle 00.32 +0200, Christian Morales Vega ha scritto:

2008/9/26 Carlos E. R. :

...

My propossal too.

- - There is one disk with only oss software, so it is redistributable. - - There is another disk (add-on disk) with only non-oss softwre, so it is not redistributable.

I'm not against a non-oss add-on CD. But note that right now the DVD doesn't includes the full non-oss repo. So if the non-oss is removed from the DVD what we lose is only:

You say nothing: mp3, flash, realplayer, acroread and opera. The point is not the bandwidth, it's the ease of use. The current configuration of the DVD is offering it, the other proposed solutions, for one reason or the other, do not. P.S. I fully agree with what Bryen said on the additional medium. Regards, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Saturday 27 September 2008, Christian Morales Vega wrote:

2008/9/26 Carlos E. R. :

...

My propossal too.

- - There is one disk with only oss software, so it is redistributable. - - There is another disk (add-on disk) with only non-oss softwre, so it is not redistributable.

I'm not against a non-oss add-on CD. But note that right now the DVD doesn't includes the full non-oss repo. So if the non-oss is removed from the DVD what we lose is only:

$ du -hc `smart query --show-channels '*' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?opensuse-dvd(,.*)?\]' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?repo-non-oss(,.*)?\]' | sed 's/@\(i586\|i686\|x86_64\|noarch\).*/.\1.rpm/' | fgrep x86_64` 250K gst-fluendo-mp3-2-72.1.x86_64.rpm 106K ivtv-firmware-1.0.3-66.1.x86_64.rpm 22M java-1_6_0-sun-1.6.0.u6-8.1.x86_64.rpm 40K java-1_6_0-sun-alsa-1.6.0.u6-8.1.x86_64.rpm 7,1M java-1_6_0-sun-devel-1.6.0.u6-8.1.x86_64.rpm 32K java-1_6_0-sun-jdbc-1.6.0.u6-8.1.x86_64.rpm 296K pico-1.10-11.1.x86_64.rpm 17K unace-1.2b-745.1.x86_64.rpm 1,6M xv-3.10a-1228.1.x86_64.rpm 32M total

$ du -hc `smart query --show-channels '*' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?opensuse-dvd(,.*)?\]' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?repo-non-oss(,.*)?\]' | sed 's/@\(i586\|i686\|x86_64\|noarch\).*/.\1.rpm/' | fgrep i586` 4,4M RealPlayer-10.0.9-51.1.i586.rpm 38M acroread-8.1.2-34.1.i586.rpm 4,8M flash-player-9.0.124.0-10.1.i586.rpm 946K iscan-2.10.0.1-21.1.i586.rpm 564K iscan-proprietary-drivers-2.10.0.1-10.1.i586.rpm 16M moneyplex-2008-2.1.i586.rpm 6,2M opera-9.27-15.1.i586.rpm 70M total

$ du -hc `smart query --show-channels '*' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?opensuse-dvd(,.*)?\]' | grep -E '\[(.*, )?repo-non-oss(,.*)?\]' | sed 's/@\(i586\|i686\|x86_64\|noarch\).*/.\1.rpm/' | fgrep noarch` 3,2M AdobeICCProfiles-2.0-111.1.noarch.rpm 2,4M IPAGothic-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 3,1M IPAMincho-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 2,4M IPAPGothic-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 3,1M IPAPMincho-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 2,4M IPAUIGothic-002.003-22.1.noarch.rpm 21K adaptec-firmware-1.32-16.1.noarch.rpm 15K ant-javamail-1.7.0-132.1.noarch.rpm 155K atmel-firmware-1.3-113.1.noarch.rpm 315K ipw-firmware-8-82.1.noarch.rpm 126K iscan-firmware-2.8.0.1-48.1.noarch.rpm 62K iwl3945-ucode-2.14.1.5-50.1.noarch.rpm 75K iwl4965-ucode-4.44.1.20-11.1.noarch.rpm 220K javamail-1.4-190.1.noarch.rpm 247K javamail-monolithic-1.4-190.1.noarch.rpm 238K qlogic-firmware-1.0-121.1.noarch.rpm 18M total

Remove Java from the list (OpenJDK), and the firmwares that will be still in the DVD (and add packages not available in the online repo: agfa-fonts...). The only "big" (>5MB) files are acroread, moneyplex and opera. I'm sure acroread is needed in some cases... but I never found one. No idea what moneyplex is. And an user can live with Firefox instead of Opera.

I don't really see a big lose. -1 :-) M

-- Michael Löffler, Product Management Email: michl@suse.de Phone: +49 911 74053-376 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nürnberg - AG Nürnberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Il giorno sab, 27/09/2008 alle 09.58 +0200, Stephan Binner ha scritto:

On Saturday 27 September 2008 00:01:22 Alberto Passalacqua wrote:

...

I hope we don't need to discuss this again too.

Do you see it mentioned in the original proposal? It's only you trying to mix it into this thread.

I'm sorry, it was not my intention to "mix it". But it's exactly the proposal that links to that discussion. Regards, A. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

IMHO the best solution would be to ship all packages that allow redistribution (1) without a note inside the general EULA (2) so that the media could ship with a user friendly EULA.

I still think those speaking of "user unfriendly EULA" should be ignored, keeping the DVD as it is. However, I would agree with the idea of letting the users download the additional packages if a specific set of links (1-click?) or a specific application to do that will be put right on the desktop. A sort of "Install restricted software and drivers" tool would probably do the job. Regards, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

If you would be aware of the huge enforcement of Novell with "pushing" openSUSE at the U.S. market (in real, not already "market", but the pre-stage "publicity"), you would understand that the main goal is to achieve "public acceptance".

So it would be very helpful if the EULA could explicitely state the extreme freeness I have suggested earlier.

I agree with the need of expanding that "market", but I don't think it is the EULA that blocks that. And yes, I don't know what Novell is doing in that direction. It is not written or discussed anywhere that I know. It would be interesting to know however, considering we are the community Novell is trying to expand. However I'm in US, and all what I see are RHEL and Ubuntu. Sometime fedora. When I suggest to try openSUSE I get all sort of answers when someone else try to explain to me that they prefer something else (generally ubuntu), but they never mention the lack of freedom and the EULA. It is more related to the ease of use, the cleanliness, the availability of software, the ease of finding someone who uses it and might help. A user wants everything out of the box or in a very straightforward and automated way. We can't have proprietary drivers and codecs on openSUSE media, and that's OK. But here we are discussing of removing what we can have, and I don't see how this can help pushing openSUSE in the "market". All the proposed solutions (additional medium, automatic addition of the nonOSS repository at installation) introduce more problems than the advantage coming from a "user friendly" licence. I will sum them up shortly. Hypothesis 1: Automatic addition of the non-OSS installation source during the installation. This technique might, in principle, work. You start the installation process, you are requested if you want to install also proprietary software, and then proceed. However you assume that the user has network access, that the network card is recognised and doesn't require particular configuration (there is no tool to do that in the installer, at least not easily), if the system is a laptop, you also probably assume the user is using an open wireless network. If your user respects these requirements, you're not done, because you have to hope that the re-director works, and our past experience shows exactly the opposite, especially close to release, when the load is high. Result: you make more users unhappy than those you can attract removing some lines from an EULA read by just a few people. Hypothesis 2: Additional non-OSS medium. It would not be downloaded by anyone, mainly because you don't really need it. If you can download an additional CD, you just use the network to install your packages. So, if it is really necessary to remove those packages (I don't think it is), I think the only viable solution not to make things harder, is to move them to the repository and then introduce something that makes their installation automatic. It might be a link on the desktop to a web page with 1-click links, a small application with a software list. Why this should work better than the "Hypothesis 1". It's simple: it can be repeated if the network doesn't work or if the redirector fails. However, whatever will be decided it needs to be simple for the user, not for Novell or the developers. All the tricks we have to configure repositories (too many), to install nvidia/ati drivers, additional codecs and so on are one of the major drawbacks for someone coming from the simplicity of distribution like Ubuntu. Regards, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Saturday 2008-09-27 at 10:02 +0200, Stephan Binner wrote:

On Saturday 27 September 2008 05:35:14 Alberto Passalacqua wrote:

...

We can't have proprietary drivers and codecs on openSUSE media, that's OK.

You're mistaken - did you read the original post and the linked wiki page? It clearly lists inclusion of proprietary firmware that allows redistribution.

I suppose you are not proposing to include the codecs in the disk? Notice that by "codecs" we mean the multimedia codecs. Maybe you don't mean them, but we do >:-P (joking) - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjeLVQACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XYzACdHgZNrPcU1INYSM490pn8XP2K GDcAnAyN5WbTLesHZMNjt9/oqSkwa2mN =EEFB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

The additional CD is a "lesser" evil, as it helps those people that know that they will have problems getting things from Internet at install time. You are not forced to download and use the CD, it is just another option.

The additional CD won't be downloaded by a lot of people anyway. It is better not to have it: you save the time of making it and you save space on the mirrors. Regards, A. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

So, if it is really necessary to remove those packages (I don't think it is), I think the only viable solution not to make things harder, is to move them to the repository and then introduce something that makes their installation automatic. It might be a link on the desktop to a web page with 1-click links, a small application with a software list. Why this should work better than the "Hypothesis 1". It's simple: it can be repeated if the network doesn't work or if the redirector fails.

+1 Wireless cards during installation could be not detected or work properly. Just asking what value could have my vote... :) Ciao Roberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Sunday 2008-09-28 at 00:08 +0200, Michael Loeffler wrote: ...

The "Adobe" family does not allow redistribution. For acroread there are eqivalent open source vesions available.

The open source versions have incomplete functionality, unfortunately. Filling forms, for instance, is missing. Some files display incorrectly.

But I'm wonder - we all want to support open source software, but if it comes to the point of convencience too many say we need to have this proprietary stuff.

Right. Do you want to serve best those wanting pure oss, or those wanting convenience? Is serving both possible? - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjesTIACgkQtTMYHG2NR9WSUwCdGnGQdR8mKUcAaZw0/xhH6PMy 50kAnjDd5h3ShlEBOHwPUZqGCFP0QMpg =k6lU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Saturday 2008-09-27 at 18:04 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:

On Saturday 27 September 2008 05:18:24 pm Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

The Sunday 2008-09-28 at 00:08 +0200, Michael Loeffler wrote:

...

...

The "Adobe" family does not allow redistribution. For acroread there are eqivalent open source vesions available.

The open source versions have incomplete functionality, unfortunately. Filling forms, for instance, is missing. Some files display incorrectly.

Sincerely, I needed commercial Reader once in a few years, and that was filling forms feature. If there is many like me (question for next poll?) than Reader can be downloaded.

Depends... here (Spain), our government is using acrobat forms to fill up some taxes and documents. So it will depend on your line of work whether adobe reader is necessary. Just an example.

...

...

But I'm wonder - we all want to support open source software, but if it comes to the point of convencience too many say we need to have this proprietary stuff.

Right. Do you want to serve best those wanting pure oss, or those wanting convenience? Is serving both possible?

It is possible. Just setup selection window similar to desktop selection and ask user:

x complete system including few free commercial programs with different license terms than opensource

- pure oss system

If you don't understand what is pure oss system than you probably don't need it. Leave default.

Yes, but the problem now is not installing a pure oss system (that's easy), but distributing a pure oss dvd or not. My variation on the original proposal is having a pure oss dvd, plus both an online non-oss repo and a non-oss disk (CD, perhaps). Mirrors having problems with non oss stuff do not need to mirror those, so problem solved for all, IMO. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjev1sACgkQtTMYHG2NR9WSoACgjISgWGRdbVtJBMmrVtR28vbw zvMAn36SOq2FZmwLd/N/sz7ash39lxVo =Tdrb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 2008-09-30 at 11:10 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:

...

...

...

The "Adobe" family does not allow redistribution. For acroread there are eqivalent open source vesions available.

The open source versions have incomplete functionality, unfortunately. Filling forms, for instance, is missing. Some files display incorrectly.

Did you file bugs for misrendered PDF?

Why? It is a widely known fact. I doubt the developpers don't know this.

Note that evince is supposed to support forms, so maybe you don't need acroread anymore?

I'll try. [...] Looks promissing. [...] Failed. A tick box is filled with "$" instead of "X". It looks very good, though. I wasn't aware of this progress. However, these forms being from the goverment, I doubt in case of issues I'd get any support unless I use the aproved adobe program. There is also the problem of PDF documents with "scan dot" zone: it is a dot matrix that the officers read with a lasser scanner, as they contain all the entered info into the form. Ie, the form is filled normally, but it is only the dot matrix that they actually read. I'm trying to get one of those to try, but the page says that I don't have the macromedia flash player installed - which is false. See? I need propietary software. https://etributos.carm.es/etributos/indexPreimpresos.html ] Usted no tiene instalado Macromedia Flash Player . ] ] Esta web, hace uso de software Macromedia® FlashTM. Usted tiene una ] versión no actualizada de Macromedia Flash Player, la cual no puede ] reproducir correctamente el contenido. ] ] ] Instale la última versión. Le llevará tan solo un instante. and they claim they can install it for me. I have: File name: npwrapper.libflashplayer.so Shockwave Flash 9.0 r124 And they want me to install: Adobe Flash Player version 9.0.124.0 .rpm for Linux (x86) | 3MB which is obviously the same. So... I need windows to at least download the forms :-/ Konqueror doesn't work, either. I'll ask about this somewhere else. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjiGPwACgkQtTMYHG2NR9Wv3wCePDXizr6jUFkbSS4JBBVXSIk8 o3wAn1A2HyUB7QOnI9D+JEqFFqUYhq3t =CZ6L -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 2008-10-01 at 10:49 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:

...

...

Did you file bugs for misrendered PDF?

Why? It is a widely known fact. I doubt the developpers don't know this.

Err, it's certainly not widely known enough for me, since I don't know that. Really, please file bugs and attach the PDF whenever possible. Note that it's better to file bugs upstream for this (either against okular/evince or against poppler at freedesktop.org if both programs have the same issue).

Ok, will do next time I find one :-)

...

...

Note that evince is supposed to support forms, so maybe you don't need acroread anymore?

I'll try. [...] Looks promissing. [...] Failed. A tick box is filled with "$" instead of "X".

Please file a bug and attach the PDF :-)

Ok, done: Bug #431521 I have found another one: Evince does not support certificates (neither does Okular). At least, I opened a suplier receipt, acrobat shows the certificate, evince does not. I haven't created a Bugzilla because I can't sent the pdf, it's private. Certificate support is also necesary for "e-administration" or "e-comerce". I hardly think this is not known? :-? Non related: evince does not appear in the Office/doc viewers system menu (11.0). Okular does. Want a bugzilla?

...

It looks very good, though. I wasn't aware of this progress. However, these forms being from the goverment, I doubt in case of issues I'd get any support unless I use the aproved adobe program.

I wouldn't expect support from my government for PDF forms ;-) Generally speaking, I'd probably save the filled PDF (even if it was filled with acroread) and check that everything looks right before sending the PDF.

Ha! PDF forms can not be "sent", not electronically anyway. That's a feature for which you have to pay Adobe. I think it needs a special server, and then you upload just the data, not the form itself. Or, if you do have the complete adobe suite (which is not sold for Linux, anyway), then you can save the filled form locally. I'm not very clear on all this. As it is, you have to type it complete, then print it, then submitt it in person and paper. The only thing it saves you is one trip to get the paper form first. There is another type of pdf form they use, but I haven't been able to get one. It has verification codes, so that you don't fill it too incorrectly, does calculations based on fields, etc. It's used for some taxes. They fill it for you at the admin office, then print it for you to review and sign. It also contains a special bar-code, that is a "dot-code" intead, containing all the data encoded. But it appears it only works against a special adobe server, and its not open to the public at large, only to selected private offices by contract. When the paper form is submitted the official scans the dot-code with a handheld laser scanner, and data is entered to the computer in seconds. As I say, I don't have a sample of these. If they work against a special server, chances are they only work with windows. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjkpkAACgkQtTMYHG2NR9W8SACgj38Ke7zuDHT/10ZZ+UGRNt4r qccAn1sdRarAm9g+tLIYfhvaSZ7QLMIg =OeHB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 2008-10-02 at 14:20 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:

Le jeudi 02 octobre 2008, à 12:45 +0200, Carlos E. R. a écrit :

...

I have found another one: Evince does not support certificates (neither does Okular). At least, I opened a suplier receipt, acrobat shows the certificate, evince does not. I haven't created a Bugzilla because I can't sent the pdf, it's private. Certificate support is also necesary for "e-administration" or "e-comerce".

I hardly think this is not known? :-?

Please file a bug in bugs.freedesktop.org against poppler.

Firefox complains: ] bugs.freedesktop.org uses an invalid security certificate. ] ] The certificate is not trusted because the issuer certificate is unknown. ] ] (Error code: sec_error_unknown_issuer) But surely the developpers must be aware wether they are supporting certificates or not.

...

Non related: evince does not appear in the Office/doc viewers system menu (11.0). Okular does. Want a bugzilla?

That's because the way we do things in GNOME: we don't want a cluttered menu, so applications like evince do not appear in the menus -- people usually double-click on the file and don't think "I will launch evince and then open the file".

Then I'll click on acrobat to read a file ;-) Ugh. I'm a gnome user, but I don't usually have the filebrowser opened. I use terminals, either CLI or midnight commander. There are quite a number of gnome applications that I call directly from the command line as I don't know how to call them by clicking on a menu: gnome-session-save gnome-session-properties gnome-control-center But also khelpcenter (gnome-help fires firefox and doesn't work right).

...

Ha! PDF forms can not be "sent", not electronically anyway. That's a feature for which you have to pay Adobe. I think it needs a special server, and then you upload just the data, not the form itself. Or, if you do have the complete adobe suite (which is not sold for Linux, anyway), then you can save the filled form locally. I'm not very clear on all this.

I think you can save the filled form with evince (not sure).

Mmm, no. I just tried. It saves a copy of the PDF without the data. Worse, the copy has doubled the original size (from 275772 to 544000), and has altered the colours of the document to to point of being useless. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjlF4EACgkQtTMYHG2NR9UZswCfXVuEORNp4/qCSPixkyFQ2j/h 2VkAn3qdGVsoRDG4JYfjUBkn3Rd73Lq7 =sd5m -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 2008-10-02 at 21:34 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote: [ certificates support in evince ]

...

...

...

I hardly think this is not known? :-?

Please file a bug in bugs.freedesktop.org against poppler.

Firefox complains:

] bugs.freedesktop.org uses an invalid security certificate. ] ] The certificate is not trusted because the issuer certificate is unknown. ] ] (Error code: sec_error_unknown_issuer)

But surely the developpers must be aware wether they are supporting certificates or not.

Yeah, that's known. It doesn't prevent you from filing the bug, though :-)

Ok, I'll try. But is is not high priority for me, toomany things in the queue.

...

Ugh. I'm a gnome user, but I don't usually have the filebrowser opened. I use terminals, either CLI or midnight commander.

Well, if you're a terminal user, just launch evince with the terminal ;-) I understand your point, but the problem is that we also don't want to overcrowd the menus...

You could consider different levels of menus: clutered, unclutered...

...

and has altered the colours of the document to to point of being useless.

Bug!

(seriously, every time something is weird, just don't assume it's known, and file a bug)

Ok, ok. However, my main point stands: as it is, Evince can not claim to be a complete replacement for the Adobe reader. In most situations it works, but you normally don't see if it doesn't unless you try opening each file on both, so you (meaning us all) remain happy in ignorance. It's prone to fail on complex files. Adobe defines the standard, they can add new features, the rest have to catch up as best as they can. We still need acroread in the distro, and easy to install. Unless somebody creates a better static document standard, really open, and gets universal support. That's far in the future. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjl9nUACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XESgCfYudo8ZKMAWQ9rpR7xcscodEW xOgAnRLz2J3ghjrCzWBZE6jicEZltsE9 =GYnz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

I wrote a bugreport against openjdk: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=430853 Pleas add your problem. You can also first try the newer version from http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/Java:/openjdk6:/Factory/

...

- survey of usage of proprietary[4] software showed that only flashplayer and acroread really are used by a majority of users (Java is not an issue anymore as we ship with 11.1 openJDK)

11.1b1 with openjdk doesn't support the security stuff of my home bank - and thus it won't work for at least half of the Danish population as most banks here use the same system - so it's very much an issue.

I think other countries use similar systems too.

-- Neues Auto? http://suchen.mobile.de/fahrzeuge/details.html?id=71780305 http://www.autoscout24.de/Details.aspx?ts=290937.5&id=beuidujcy3yo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org