Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sailfish OS "Hossa" Upgrades From The Old eglibc 2.19, But Still Relying On GCC 4

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

  • Sailfish OS "Hossa" Upgrades From The Old eglibc 2.19, But Still Relying On GCC 4

    Phoronix: Sailfish OS "Hossa" Upgrades From The Old eglibc 2.19, But Still Relying On GCC 4

    Jolla released Sailfish OS 3.0.3 "Hossa" as the newest feature update to their mobile Linux OS. With this update they've begun a number of much-needed low-level improvements to their platform...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...lfish-OS-Hossa

  • #2
    That doesn't exactly sound great. GCC 4.9 is ancient, and more importantly, Firefox/Gecko 45 definitely is too old for serious use.

    Comment


    • #3
      Sailfish suffers from some weird requirement of avoiding all GPLv3 packages, so it ships some ancient Bash and other packages that used to be GPLv2 and became GPLv3. It's a weird approach to ship obsolete software due to licensing restrictions.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by shmerl View Post
        Sailfish suffers from some weird requirement of avoiding all GPLv3 packages, so it ships some ancient Bash and other packages that used to be GPLv2 and became GPLv3. It's a weird approach to ship obsolete software due to licensing restrictions.
        That is their "We invite partners, customers, community members and Sailfish OS users worldwide to join us in building a more open future." (citation from company's homepage).

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by shmerl View Post
          Sailfish suffers from some weird requirement of avoiding all GPLv3 packages, so it ships some ancient Bash and other packages that used to be GPLv2 and became GPLv3. It's a weird approach to ship obsolete software due to licensing restrictions.
          Torvalds is always right.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Leinad View Post

            That is their "We invite partners, customers, community members and Sailfish OS users worldwide to join us in building a more open future." (citation from company's homepage).
            It's a fallacy. Partners care about up to date system, not about GPLv2.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by shmerl View Post
              Sailfish suffers from some weird requirement of avoiding all GPLv3 packages, so it ships some ancient Bash and other packages that used to be GPLv2 and became GPLv3. It's a weird approach to ship obsolete software due to licensing restrictions.
              I'm working at a company developing and shipping a GPLv2 licensed software and I can tell you that licensing is an issue. GPLv3 code is virtually unusable for us, we can't integrate any of that without violating laws. We really can't integrate some readily available librarys and stuff and have to reinvent the wheel sometimes. The bigger your product gets and the more functionality you integrate, the bigger are the hurdles to relicense to another license, too...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post

                I'm working at a company developing and shipping a GPLv2 licensed software and I can tell you that licensing is an issue. GPLv3 code is virtually unusable for us, we can't integrate any of that without violating laws. We really can't integrate some readily available librarys and stuff and have to reinvent the wheel sometimes. The bigger your product gets and the more functionality you integrate, the bigger are the hurdles to relicense to another license, too...
                Bullshit.

                GPLv3 only requires that users are able to install modified versions of software covered by that license. There is no legal requirement that your software can't warn that a modified component has been installed, it's just not allowed to block doing so.

                Comment


                • #9
                  They can probably build most or all of their stack with llvm/clang and uclibc or musl so why not just do that?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post

                    I'm working at a company developing and shipping a GPLv2 licensed software and I can tell you that licensing is an issue. GPLv3 code is virtually unusable for us, we can't integrate any of that without violating laws. We really can't integrate some readily available librarys and stuff and have to reinvent the wheel sometimes. The bigger your product gets and the more functionality you integrate, the bigger are the hurdles to relicense to another license, too...
                    How is that? Unless your company is pushing some sick DRM or any of such garbage, which anti-tivoisation is aimed to prevent, GPLv3 should not be an issue. You should question your company methods if that happens.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X