Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME Took In $556k Last Year While Spending $675.9k

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • felipec
    replied
    You are so wrong on so many levels it's ridiculous.

    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    So you got told to fuck off.
    No I wasn't.

    Why did it take you so long to fix it if it was so important?
    It didn't. I fixed it immediately for me.

    You doomed yourself from there, they hung up the phone after your first sentence and told you where to go.
    They doomed themselves. It's their shitty project, and it's their bug.

    I don't give a fuck what they do. I fixes it for myself, it's their own users the one that suffer, including themselves.

    They dont work for you. They are not obliged to do work for you, least of all wrestle with a patch by someone who is incapable of even writing a description of what the patch does, how it works, what the side effects are and what else will need doing.
    You are retarded. This is the full description of the patch:

    Code:
    vte: send child-exited when child exits
    
    The commit 7888602 (lib: Rework child exit and EOF handling, 2019-11-17) introduced a regression when grandchild processes are present.
    
    The bug is easy to reproduce:
    
    sleep 10 & exit
    
    The reason is that the `child-exited` signal is delayed to until after eos has been received, but that doesn't happen until after all the grandchild processes have exited.
    
    The `child-exited` signal should be emitted when the child has exited. Period.
    
    If we do that all the complexity of delaying the signal, including the hacks, can be removed.
    
    Fixes #204.

    Why do you claim I didn't write a description if you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about?

    Unbelievable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nth_man
    replied
    Originally posted by mSparks View Post

    > > > Meanwhile, GTK is all hippy gangster, being in every definition of the term, open source, LGPL licenced.

    > the modifications made by mercedes benz or the source to their OS [...]
    Mmm... If Mercedes Benz makes its version of GTK, and it's not distributed outside of that company, is GTK closed source?

    Leave a comment:


  • mSparks
    replied
    Originally posted by Nth_man View Post

    and use Qt, study its source code, modify it, adapt it, distribute it, etc....
    lies, that does not link the modifications made by mercedes benz or the source to their OS they would need to distribute if QTgraphs was actually GPL licensed rather than just pretending.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nth_man
    replied
    Originally posted by mSparks View Post

    > Qt consists of multiple libraries but it is one product.

    Sure, that's why you need multiple 10 day free trials, sigh, I'm not sure why you feel the need to pretend, everyone with an ounce of interest already read the QT website.
    Those 10 days free trials are for products like Qt Design Studio​ (and for software bundles that incorporate software like it). As anda_skoa ​ wrote:
    You can download the Qt sources as a package from https://download.qt.io/ or clone repositories hosted by The Qt Company or their GitHub mirrors​.
    and use Qt, study its source code, modify it, adapt it, distribute it, etc....
    Last edited by Nth_man; 18 May 2024, 04:39 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • mSparks
    replied
    Originally posted by anda_skoa View Post
    Qt consists of multiple libraries but it is one product.
    Sure, that's why you need multiple 10 day free trials, sigh, I'm not sure why you feel the need to pretend, everyone with an ounce of interest already read the QT website.

    Leave a comment:


  • anda_skoa
    replied
    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    You might not be aware, but Qt is a lot more than than two products
    Qt consists of multiple libraries but it is one product.

    The Qt Company has other products though, e.g. QtCreator.

    The point was that one cannot just take know facts about one product and then assume they will also apply to a vendor's other products.
    Like the assumption of the other poster that if the sources of DOS were available so must be the sources of Windows.

    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    all of which are available as closed source solutions
    You are mixing different things.

    Qt is, among other options, available under a commercial license, however even that gives you access to the source and the rights to modify and distribute.
    Which would not be possible under as a closed source solution.

    Terms of a license and commercialization are orthogonal.
    Charging money for a software doesn't mean you have to deny access to it sources just like having a free software license doesn't prohibit you to charge money for the software.

    I understand this is difficult to grasp as certain combinations are more widely used than others.
    And this is even more complicated to get right in the context of Qt since it is available in multiple such combinations.

    I guess one could ask for a closed source license option for Qt but I really don't see why anyone would do that nor why the Qt company would grant that given their sources are so public.

    Leave a comment:


  • mSparks
    replied
    Originally posted by anda_skoa View Post

    You might not be aware but DOS and Windows are two different products.
    Same vendor but quite different code bases.

    Windows is a good example of a closed source product because even if you got the code somehow you would not be allowed to modify and build it, let alone distributed the result.

    All things you can do with Qt under the terms of any of its licenses.
    You might not be aware, but Qt is a lot more than than two products, all of which are available as closed source solutions, and some of which are and always will be (L)GPL'd, because the (L)GPL licences are unrevokable, although you cannot actually contribute to Qt under (L)GPL licences.

    This is called CLA war. where you pretend to be open source while in fact, not actually being open source.

    Meanwhile, GTK is all hippy gangster, being in every definition of the term, open source, LGPL licenced.

    Leave a comment:


  • anda_skoa
    replied
    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    So what you are saying is because you can download
    windows is open source.
    You might not be aware but DOS and Windows are two different products.
    Same vendor but quite different code bases.

    Windows is a good example of a closed source product because even if you got the code somehow you would not be allowed to modify and build it, let alone distributed the result.

    All things you can do with Qt under the terms of any of its licenses.

    Leave a comment:


  • mSparks
    replied
    Originally posted by anda_skoa View Post

    You can download the Qt sources as a package from https://download.qt.io/ or clone repositories hosted by The Qt Company or their GitHub mirrors
    Uhuh
    So what you are saying is because you can download



    windows is open source.
    Gotcha,

    Leave a comment:


  • anda_skoa
    replied
    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    So where do i get and modify the source used in
    You can download the Qt sources as a package from https://download.qt.io/ or clone repositories hosted by The Qt Company or their GitHub mirrors

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X