On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Joerg Schilling < Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:
Why does e.g. Debian still ship libcdio? Every unbiased person should have no problem to understand that what Debian did was just a slander campaign against an OpenSource project.
Jörg
Jörg, why don't you just change the license of your cdrtools to a licensing scheme - either change every part of it to the GPL, set it under a dual license or whatever - which is indisputable and doubtless instead of arguing with the distributors all the time over years?
It's really annoying to always read your nonsense regarding the licensing.
The problem seems to be only that people believe the liensing nonsense FUD spread by Debian.
Distributors who did ask their lawyers did either never change to the broken and illegal cod from Debian (Sun) or do again ship cdrtools (Suse).
I still don't understand why you ask mee to introduce a "solution" for a non-existent problem.
Jörg
-- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de<EMail%3Ajoerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de>(home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ * * *Korean Guide: Korean start -> Trucha bug -> Korean extra -> The basics -> Update* *Other Languages: Dutch* * * *Latest update: April 24th 2010 -- Images have not been made by us, please don't credit us for them!*
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
How does any of this relate to the initial thread question whatsoever? Turning a simple question about burning an iso from CLI into an ongoing debate that was just on the Arch ML not a few months ago is rather annoying. I am sure I am not the only one that would like to see this debate taken elsewhere, and please let the thread die.