--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "minix3" group.
To post to this group, send email to min...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to minix3+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minix3?hl=en.
Yes, great work but I just hope that Minix will not abandon its CLI
only installer. It is simple but effective and pure, kinda like
OpenBSD installer.
--Andy
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Tom Chandler <tchan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Watch the video. GREAT WORK. I hope this work gets included
> in the official release. Moves the "bar" higher, show Minix3 is
> truly a maturing OS and easy to use.
Yes, great work but I just hope that Minix will not abandon its CLI
only installer. It is simple but effective and pure, kinda like
OpenBSD installer.
--Andy
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Ivan Gualandri
<ivan.gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> in these days i worked on the dialog based setup (i hope someone is
> interested).
>
> It is quite completed, i just need to add the final touches some error
> checs. I prepared a video to show how it could appear:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugqbRCYPYP0&feature=g-all-esi&context=G2926cafFAAAAAAAAAAA
Well done! I enjoyed the video :-)
--
Evgeniy
Fantastic job, very impressive.
The progress bar is a very nice touch too.
I think dialog is GPLled, or uses an LGPLled library, right..?
That is unfortunately a problem for using the distribution.
Perhaps you can recreate your work with the bsd-licensed clone?
And I think the complete forking of setup is a bit suboptimal (double updates).
The actions should be shared where possible; or perhaps your code could be merged into setup itself, which then has 2 modes (is is callable from 2 names, etc.).
If you are willing to address these things
I don't see why we couldn't adopt it.
Thanks a lot for doing all that work, the video is a nice touch too.
Hi,
> > Fantastic job, very impressive.
+1
In a way you are right: using an LGPL'ed component does not require
> > That is unfortunately a problem for using the distribution.
>
> AFAIK LGPL is compatible with BSD License. Or i'm wrong?
you to make the code using is (L)GPL. However, the problem is of a
different nature. One of our 'selling points' is that we want to
provide a system that anyone can modify without being forced to open
source their contributions. If our base system contains an (L)GPL'ed
component, they cannot modify that part even if it doesn't affect the
other part's licensing.
If there is a BSD licensed one in the NetBSD source tree, that would
> > Perhaps you can recreate your work with the bsd-licensed clone?
>
> What is that clone? I didn't knew about it.
be the first candidate. Second choice would be FreeBSD if it has one.
Thanks for your hard work,
Erik
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "minix3" group.
To post to this group, send email to min...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to minix3+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minix3?hl=en.
The one in current use (v2.17) is such. In the meantime both NetBSD and
DragonFly had switched to respectively v2.20 and v2.21, which are GPLv3.
> Maybe you found a BSD licensed alternative?
The closest such thing is elftoolchain, http://elftoolchain.sf.net or
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/elftoolchain/; while there are progress
done there, it is not completely ready, particularly on the linker tool.
A previous version of the underlying library has been ported to MINIX
(lib/libelf), but stays of very much low usage; work has been done
recently by the elftoolchain people to consider MINIX as a possible
target, but I do not know if it will be merged.
A missing component of elftoolchain are assemblers, but here we have the
yasm assembler http://yasm.tortall.net/, which combines the BSD license,
an up-to-date x86 assembler targeting ELF, and a "AT&T syntax" parser
including the numerous GNU assembler specifics which are now considered
"standard"! In fact, there is already even a working package for MINIX
of YASM v1.1. The only defect I found with yasm when used as compiler
back-end, is the high level of noise it produces because of the numerous
"uninitialized space declared" warnings...still a detail!
But I do not know if someone has been assigned to work on such a change.
Antoine