Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Operating Systems Media Software Technology

XBian's Koenkk Replies To the XBian/RaspBMC Flap 63

New submitter juenger1701 writes "Xbian's developer Koenkk has posted a reply to the code stealing accusations mentioned here Friday." In response, Sam Nazarko of Raspbmc has replaced his earlier complaint, "on the agreement that XBian participate with compliance of the GPL." Koenkk makes the case that his project has always complied with the GPL.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

XBian's Koenkk Replies To the XBian/RaspBMC Flap

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 23, 2012 @02:52AM (#41426407)

    For GPL and LGPL licenses the source code must be provided by the _distributor_, it doesn't matter whether you modified it or not.

  • Re:Jesus Christ. (Score:5, Informative)

    by sumdumass ( 711423 ) on Sunday September 23, 2012 @04:07AM (#41426607) Journal

    Xbian and raspbmc are competing distributions of operating systems for the rasbery pi .(you can google rasbery pi).

    Well, I say operating systems but they seem to be more or less flash utilities and scripts to change some settings and load debian linux from a debian repository somewhere. The quip seems to be over the installer program in which something was claimed to have been copied without attribution to the copyright holders or provisions in the GPL for redistributing the source.

    Both projects seem to be run by kids which is really evident if you caught any of the back and forth banter over the last couple of days. I'm not really sure why this makes the front page of slashdot. Maybe I borked some settings or something.

  • If you are really that obsessed with getting it from them because technically maybe it requires them to put it on there own servers you have a serious problem.

    Well, GNU has a serious problem with people not putting it on their own servers [gnu.org].

    The only thing that might have made this an issue is if they got the source code from a party which does not distribute it publicly and then linked to it.

    Wrong, and also wrong. See above link.

    Actually having the source code published is NOT required.

    And, wrong again. But don't take my word for it, follow my link above and let the FSF explain it to you in a FAQ that you should read before making such idiotic statements, whoever you are besides a coward.

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Working...