Slashdot Once More...

[DijiTao]

Personally I don’t believe I ever whined to get the GP2X released early – and yes I believe that the people that did have caused us all a headache or two, but this is a very different issue as I see it. We’re talking about literally no more effort expended then zipping up a directory and uploading a file to the achieve. If it’s any harder then that (because they’ve mixed proprietary code in with GPL’d code) then they need to admit it, and address that issue, so in the future making a source release in conjunction to a binary release is a trivial matter. The last time we went through this I wrote some letters, and didn’t get much back in the way of replies. When the buggy incomplete kernel was released I gave up on the matter, as I took the release as a sign of goodwill that all would be well soon. That was awhile ago. The solution to this problem has to have two parts – part (a) is what we want, part (B) is what happens if we don’t get what we want. I am squarely more focused on the (B) part of the equation. Whipping the community up into frenzy is part of the solution, because if GPH believes nobody really cares, then nothing is going to happen. So my GPL zealotry has a purpose. The (a) part falls more into the realm of those people who can actually do something useful with the code and ultimately the person whom I have the up most respect for on the matter is DjWillis. Personally I would like to be able to contribute code to the project in a meaningful way, but my lack of ability prohibits me from doing such when the source I can find isn’t in a complete compile-able form. When DjWillis writes they’re pissing on the GPL, I’m inclined to believe he has a reason to say that. I really want to hear back from the true pillars of the community on what they think needs to be done. I know my suggestion are harsh, but so is pissing on the GPL.

What do we want?
What happens if we don’t get it?

 

[Thraka]

Just read the whole thread.. phew...

If they have created and released any updates to firmware or kernal and they say they have to wait for source code for those updates to be uploaded also, why not distribute the binaries WITH the source code? Noone has suggested that to them

I don't think that our community (software releases, forums, the news) should be shut down but the sales of GP2X should cease. Really lets not shoot ourselves in the foot, but keep the gun aimed at them. The only way they benefit is by us selling their product, not us making new pieces of their product. And reaching into a company's pocket book is the way to get through to them. There are investors and jobs on the line if they aren't selling the product.

Also, we should ALL send emails every day once a day together to them. It should just be simple like

"Release the Source Code to the Firmware and Kernal. Here is a link to upload it to: HTTP:\\BLAH BLAH" or whatever Or something about evil dragons email addy for an account to ftp.

 

[Deed]

Seems to me that many people seem to want the GP2x to die by focussing on this issue. Why? It is impossible in the modern world to not violate copyright in some form - ever read a mate's magazine? Ever kept a tv program for more than 28 days? Are you using mp3's? Do you watch a dvd with your partner? DO YOU USE ROMS FOR EMULATION (eg on GP2x?).

​

Finally ! There is not only insane people here !!! :blink: I'm not alone
For the rest of you : please immediately erase all these stealed roms. I don't think you are all owning thousands jamma cards and megadrive cartridges, are you ? <_<

GP2X community is really a whiner's community. Sure, GPH must GPLd the source code, but you're going too far ...

​

*Sighs* It's not about copyright, its about open source! I'm not one that usually calls people stupid, but this is a close call... Without the source code, we are totally dependent on Gamepark (Dignsys) for firmware bugfixes/improvements. The essense of the GPL is that free and open code should stay free and open.

​

I was reacting because some people here were using the term "criminal" :angry:
GPH is just as criminal as these dumb ass ... I'm not used to bash anyone, but this is really killing me ...

Furthermore, open source and copyright ARE related subjects : you say "The essense of the GPL is that free and open code should stay free and open.". I say : "The essense of the copyright is that copyrighted roms should not be free".

Furthermore, I just realized that many people here must NOT have a gp2x itself. Easy to say "stop development, stop archiving files at gp32x.de" in this case :blink:

 

[Silberstein]

Seems to me that many people seem to want the GP2x to die by focussing on this issue. Why? It is impossible in the modern world to not violate copyright in some form - ever read a mate's magazine? Ever kept a tv program for more than 28 days? Are you using mp3's? Do you watch a dvd with your partner? DO YOU USE ROMS FOR EMULATION (eg on GP2x?).

​

Finally ! There is not only insane people here !!! :blink: I'm not alone
For the rest of you : please immediately erase all these stealed roms. I don't think you are all owning thousands jamma cards and megadrive cartridges, are you ? <_<

GP2X community is really a whiner's community. Sure, GPH must GPLd the source code, but you're going too far ...

​

*Sighs* It's not about copyright, its about open source! I'm not one that usually calls people stupid, but this is a close call... Without the source code, we are totally dependent on Gamepark (Dignsys) for firmware bugfixes/improvements. The essense of the GPL is that free and open code should stay free and open.

​

I was reacting because some people here were using the term "criminal" :angry:
GPH is just as criminal as these dumb ass ... I'm not used to bash anyone, but this is really killing me ...

Furthermore, open source and copyright ARE related subjects : you say "The essense of the GPL is that free and open code should stay free and open.". I say : "The essense of the copyright is that copyrighted roms should not be free".

Furthermore, I just realized that many people here must NOT have a gp2x itself. Easy to say "stop development, stop archiving files at gp32x.de" in this case :blink:

​

You are trying to justify one bad thing by comparing it to another. That won't work.

And another thing, people who play roms does not take any profit from it (strictly speaking). Gamepark are making money out of GP-licenced code. If they do not follow the GPL they are making money from code other people has written, but ignoring the conditions under wich they could use this code. That IS criminal. More "criminal" than playing roms I would say.

 

[Mr.Jabberwocky]

If they are saying that the current kernel source is available on their site and someone with the knowledge can confirm this is true, is there even an issue ?
If the kernel is the only GPL'd component and it is available, this whole thread is a load of hot air.
Before I would be willing to start throwing rocks at them I would want someone qualified to confirm exactly what the situation is. Which components fall under the GPL and has the source for them been put into the public domain ?
If you don't know the answer 100% to these two questions, and it turns out they have complied, some people on this board are going to look like right dicks.

 

[DijiTao]

I've got a gp2x - I'm not just saying all this while knowing it wouldn't effect me.

I'm not saying we need to "stop development, stop archiving files at gp32x.de" right now - I'm saying give GPH a deadline to get the kernel sources released, and to adopt a new policy of releasing the kernel sources within a "reasonable" period of time after each binary release, if however they don't meet this deadline, then "stop development, stop archiving files at gp32x.de".

On the criminal note - my point is that I seriously doubt CraigX would ship out GP2X's pre-loaded with 100's of copyright infringing roms because that would make him a criminal, but shipping out units with GPL infringing code is the exact same crime, and so if you wouldn't do one, you should not do the other.

 

[p00pty]

On the criminal note - my point is that I seriously doubt CraigX would ship out GP2X's pre-loaded with 100's of copyright infringing roms because that would make him a criminal

​

Wasnt there illegal content on the CD sent out with lots of the pre ordered GP2X's from CraigX, I didnt recive a CD myself but I do remember reading about it on these forums

 

[dioxide]

I blame Global Warming.... WE DIDINT LISTEN!!!

 

[DaveC]

We just have to make sure that the pressure, legal or otherwise, is put in the right place. I think GPH doesn't have much power to get much in the way of source. They can request it from dignsys but if they say "no" then what? Sure they could try to sue them. In that case the problem is first that would cost alot of money, money that GPH doesn't have. Second after alienating Dignsys they could and would tell GPH to piss off. Then what? They would be stuck with a buggy system forever.

So we should be putting the pressure on dignsys as they are the ones with the source and the control of it. It seems that everyone, including GPH, are at the mercy of dignsys.

 

[abigsmurf]

it's this kind of rabid responce to GPL related matters that actively stops companies investing in Open source software. Why spend money modifying software to suit your needs then having to worry about how much of your system now needs to be made public because even the slightest GPL violation gets this kind of reaction, when you can spend the same amount on a commercially available piece of software without all the hassle.

What exactly do people threatening to sue (or at least throw nasty words) at GPH hope to acheive? a Mass recall of GP2X units (oh by the way, you know it'll be illegal for you to still own your consoles?)? For GPH to decide that linux isn't worth it and make the next firmware update remove it and leave ultra basic functionality and make 95% of the software created so far useless? For GPH to decide homebrew altogether isn't worth it and require software to have a digital signiture? For GPH to go out of business and the GP2X to instantly die on it's feet (remembering that anyone owning the console will be breaking the law still)?

I can't be bothered with all this GPL stuff to be honest. Do we really need the firmware? probably not because any updates we do ourselves will be rendered obsolete or just overwritten by the next official firmware update. Unless of course we have the fun of constantly mixing two independently written pieces of code and all the fun that entails

 

[ThorC]

Perhaps an ideal solution would be setting up or using CVS or something along those ligns with Dignsys. The community get the source and can help work together on the firmware, Dignsys get some help from some great coders (it sounds like they are busy as it is) and could still be payed on contract to work on it and the users get updated and more useful firmware. A win for all sides.

It's a difficult situation, it'd be much better if they made their intention directly clear - are they going to become compliant and stay so?

 

[DaveC]

I don't know why we need them anyway. Linux is ported to systems that never even had it. Why couldn't we make a good version of linux ourselves that has all of the needed libraries etc that the current software needs? Then we could make a smaller bug free version and upgrade it ourselves, we wouldn't even need dignsys's buggy mess. We know what the magiceyes hardware is, would it be that difficult?

 

[Cyclops]

it's this kind of rabid responce to GPL related matters that actively stops companies investing in Open source software. Why spend money modifying software to suit your needs then having to worry about how much of your system now needs to be made public because even the slightest GPL violation gets this kind of reaction, when you can spend the same amount on a commercially available piece of software without all the hassle.

What exactly do people threatening to sue (or at least throw nasty words) at GPH hope to acheive? a Mass recall of GP2X units (oh by the way, you know it'll be illegal for you to still own your consoles?)? For GPH to decide that linux isn't worth it and make the next firmware update remove it and leave ultra basic functionality and make 95% of the software created so far useless? For GPH to decide homebrew altogether isn't worth it and require software to have a digital signiture? For GPH to go out of business and the GP2X to instantly die on it's feet (remembering that anyone owning the console will be breaking the law still)?

I can't be bothered with all this GPL stuff to be honest. Do we really need the firmware? probably not because any updates we do ourselves will be rendered obsolete or just overwritten by the next official firmware update. Unless of course we have the fun of constantly mixing two independently written pieces of code and all the fun that entails. The current reality is most would use the open source version for the very reason, not GPH currently, and GPH would lose all control.

​

I just read slashdot from top to bottom its not rabid. Its stopped being a slight violation a long time ago.

Its better that the functionality is removed. If like now its a *barrier* to development. Look at the menu screen and think how long its taken for simple functionality to be added, and its a damn menu!

Unfortunatly its mainly people guessing how GPL works or is, and how to impliment it legally, because what we all understand(that being the *spirit* of GPL) is not being met. I don't care about the law. I want the *sprit* because it wil benefit me.

Whats interesting is everybody is discussing Law which they don't understand, and not business which is somewhat easier to understand. i.e how they and GPHare the only ones that matter can benfit from releasing the source.

The current situation is not the worry of a chinese clone producing a better GP2X, but currenty all anyone has to do is release a device with linux on it that follows GPL. Their actually should be more concerned. Now they are huting themselves form both sides.

Linux allows us some freedom to move to a new platform easily, and quite soon I suspect the cost of my SD will outweigh the cost of a new device.

There is the fun of mixing two independing peices of code, but remember, the Linux kernel currently merges 10,000 of independant code every release, mecanisms to do so have existed from time. Its common in open-source projects for the company to release the source, and then drive the delelopment.

 

[nickspoon]

I don't know why we need them anyway. Linux is ported to systems that never even had it. Why couldn't we make a good version of linux ourselves that has all of the needed libraries etc that the current software needs? Then we could make a smaller bug free version and upgrade it ourselves, we wouldn't even need dignsys's buggy mess. We know what the magiceyes hardware is, would it be that difficult?

1) That would take ages, and be slow and stuff.
2) The original source would provide an ideal starting point and reference for that.

 

[shrubberyrobbery]

it's this kind of rabid responce to GPL related matters that actively stops companies investing in Open source software.

I can't be bothered with all this GPL stuff to be honest. Do we really need the firmware?

​

you're just not getting it. it's all been said already, just go back about 4 pages on the thread and re-read it all to understand why this is very important to anyone who is themselves involved in producing 'open-source' material (and who wants their OWN work to REMAIN open and free from exclusive control by someone else), and therefore by extension why it should be important to anyone ELSE who is using open-source material and benefiting from it, ie YOU.

 

[Mr.Jabberwocky]

Is there anyone here who actually understands the GPL ? If they have just used the arm linux kernel as is and have written drivers and apps not based on open source, does the GPL oblige them to publish their source ?

 

[DaveC]

I don't know why we need them anyway.  Linux is ported to systems that never even had it.  Why couldn't we make a good version of linux ourselves that has all of the needed libraries etc that the current software needs?  Then we could make a smaller bug free version and upgrade it ourselves, we wouldn't even need dignsys's buggy mess.  We know what the magiceyes hardware is, would it be that difficult?

1) That would take ages, and be slow and stuff.
2) The original source would provide an ideal starting point and reference for that.

​

We have the source. Yes it is for an outdated version but wouldn't that be good enough to start with? Thety really haven't changed much since then anyway.

 

[chris_r]

Is there anyone here who actually understands the GPL ? If they have just used the arm linux kernel as is and have written drivers and apps not based on open source, does the GPL oblige them to publish their source ?

​

If i remember correctly I think they are allowed to release closed source drivers but their code must be comletely seperate to the open source code and if any changes are made to the original open source code, the changes must be publised.

 

[Mr.Jabberwocky]

Why do we believe they have altered the kernel ?

 

[Paradox]

I don't know why we need them anyway. Linux is ported to systems that never even had it. Why couldn't we make a good version of linux ourselves that has all of the needed libraries etc that the current software needs? Then we could make a smaller bug free version and upgrade it ourselves, we wouldn't even need dignsys's buggy mess. We know what the magiceyes hardware is, would it be that difficult?

1) That would take ages, and be slow and stuff.
2) The original source would provide an ideal starting point and reference for that.

​

We have the source. Yes it is for an outdated version but wouldn't that be good enough to start with? Thety really haven't changed much since then anyway.

​

isnt that what open2x is doing?