[sf-lug] Rick's explanation of his internet setup.
rick at linuxmafia.com
Tue Jan 3 20:06:32 PST 2006
Quoting Adrien Lamothe (alamozzz at yahoo.com):
> I said "... game servers running Linux to host the game Half-Life."
> This sentence is probably unclear. It means the hardware is used to
> host the Half-Life game servers, not the clients. Half-Life servers
> are written for both Unix/Linux and Windows. The site uses the Linux
Ah. I had no idea that Half-Life uses a client-server model, not being,
as you probably figured out, much of a gamer.
[low CPU draw, in Linux:]
> That depends. KDE has gotten fairly heavy in recent years. GNOME, with
> a CORBA underpinning, is probably equally heavy.
Both environments tend towards the "heavy" in the sense of RAM gulping,
but not necessarily CPU usage -- especially if you cool it with the
optional visual effects glitter. (This is easily adjustable in KDE if not
It doesn't stand to reason that merely running a CORBA broker would
create a heavy CPU draw, y'know: It's just an object broker. That
would hit up I/O (meaning mostly disk) and RAM, but not so much CPU.
> >have found out the hard way that the proprietary drivers tend to become
> >unusable as the kernel's interfaces change, or when you try to migrate
> >the hardware to a new box (ia32 to AMD64, say).
> My SuSE distros have utilized standard stuff, unless specifically
> configured otherwise. SuSE has also done an excellent job of
> supporting AMD, both 32 and 64.)
I am not sure if you got my point on the fragility and lack of
portability of proprietary drivers, or not. Your remarks pretty much
ignore what I said. I'm delighted that your hardware works well, but
that really is unresponsive to what I said.
> If you read the SuSE 9.3 license, you will find that copying it and
> giving away those copies to others is allowed, as long as the copies
> are not given away for profit.
This is a frequently repeated misconception -- which I've been obliged
to disprove in several forums before, so I happen to have the material
First of all, that is not what the licence says, if you heed its _full_
language (cited below). Second, even if it did say that, Novell/SUSE
Linux AG would not have the copyright title enabling it to speak for
(and nullify the non-redistributable licensing of) Adobe, Real Networks,
Opera Software ASA, and Matrica AG.
Disk 1 includes a number of licensing-relevant files in its root
directory. Here are the English-language ones (as they're also
duplicated with German-language ones).
Predictably, COPYING is the text of GPLv2.
COPYRIGHT is, in part, Novell's brief GPL-compliance document, pointing
out that a number of packages' source code is available, and stating
where to get it. It also includes the following warning:
Not all programs on the CDs are free software. Some of them
are shareware, restricted to noncommercial use, or may have
other restrictive conditions.
The package information mentions the respective license and authors.
We cannot, however, ensure the correctness of this information. In
cases of doubt, refer to the original copyright information of the
LICENSE.TXT asserts formation of a contract betwen any recipient and
Novell, Inc., concerning "Software", which is defined as "the software
product identified in the title of this Agreement, media (if any), and
accompanying documentation". The "title" is "SUSE LINUX PROFESSIONAL
This text follows:
You may make and use unlimited copies of the Software for
Your distribution and use within Your Organization. You
may make and distribute unlimited copies of the Software
outside Your organization provided that: 1) You receive
no consideration; and, 2) you do not bundle or combine
the Software with another offering (e.g., software, hardware,
However, the next paragraph severely limits that grant:
The Software is a modular operating system. Most of the components
are open source packages, developed independently, and accompanied
by separate license terms. Your license rights with respect to
individual components accompanied by separate license terms are
defined by those terms; nothing in this Agreement (including, for
example, the "Other License Terms and Restrictions," below) shall
restrict, limit, or otherwise affect any rights or obligations You
may have, or conditions to which You may be subject, under such
The Software may be bundled with other software programs ("Bundled
Programs"). Your license rights with respect to Bundled Programs
accompanied by separate license terms are defined by those terms;
nothing in this Agreement shall restrict, limit, or otherwise affect
any rights or obligations You may have, or conditions to which You
may be subject, under such license terms.
Non-Novell Products. The Software may include or be bundled with
hardware or other software programs licensed or sold by a licensor
other than Novell.
Interestingly, even the generous-sounding Novell rights grant cited
above is non-transferrable!
Transfer. This Agreement may not be transferred or assigned without
the prior written approval of Novell.
So, you're allowed to "make and distribute unlimited copies of the
Software outside Your organization", but then those recipients don't
enjoy the same rights? Weird.
Interestingly, Novell restricts benchmarking!
Benchmark Testing. This benchmark testing restriction applies to
You if You are a software vendor or if You are performing testing on
the Software at the direction of or on behalf of a software vendor.
You may not, without Novell's prior written consent not to be
unreasonably withheld, publish or disclose to any third party the
results of any benchmark test of the Software.
Anyhow, I think that more than suffices to show that the claim is
incorrect. That is why I refer to 9.3 Professional as a "shrik-wrapped
retail edition", one of several they've had, off and on.
I try to keep track of the editions and their legal status, here:
More information about the sf-lug