[News] AmigaOS 4.0 Developer Pre-release goes gold | ANN.lu |
Posted on 16-Apr-2004 20:09 GMT by Mikey C | 283 comments View flat View list |
Leuven, Belgium - April 16, 2004. Hyperion Entertainment and the Amiga OS 4.0 development team are extremely pleased and relieved to announce that after nearly 30 months of painstaking development the Amiga OS 4.0 Developer Pre-release has gone gold and will be sent to the duplication plant on Monday, April 19, 2004.
Full details on Amigaworld.net
|
|
List of all comments to this article |
AmigaOS 4.0 Developer Pre-release goes gold : Comment 179 of 283 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Hans-Joerg Frieden on 17-Apr-2004 17:42 GMT | In reply to Comment 139 (Bernie Meyer): > See, Hans-Joerg, *there* is an excellent reason to provide the sources on the
> same medium as the binaries.
Sigh. I thought I already made it clear that the OS HEADERS have changed, which caused the source code to not compile at all. This is those headers that are on the SDK CD.
> You *are* aware that, on request, you must now produce the *exact* sources that
> were used to build the binaries?
Yes.
> And the *exact* support files needed to do so? And that you must honour such
> requests for at least three years?
Yes. But that can only affect those files that I have the right to give out. You will probably not tell me that I have to extend that to copyrighted material that is part of the OS, do you?
> I appreciate and admire the work you guys at Hyperion have been doing;
> However, the way you have handled the GPL really rubs me the wrong way.
Sorry if I don't know the <beep> what you are talking about. IF you are in posession of a written offer for the source code, you can happily get it from me. I will most definitely bring it into a form that will compile again. BUT what can I do if the OS headers required have changed?
I am utterly p*ssed that as usual, everyone is barking about GPL again. We've been using GPL'ed code in the past and have ALWAYS complied to it. I don't think that you either have the GDB binary or are in a possession of a written offer for the source code, so why can you claim that we are handling the GPL the wrong way? For crying out loud, there is NOTHING handled AT ALL up to now, so either you can predict the frelling future, or you are making things up.
Take your pick.
I find your suggestion to be offensive to say the least. |
|
List of all comments to this article (continued) |
|
- User Menu
-
- About ANN archives
- The ANN archives is powered by #AmigaZeux. It was updated daily (news last: 22-Oct-2004; comments last: 18-May-2005).
ANN.lu was created, previously owned and maintained by Christian Kemp, www.ckemp.com.
- Contribute
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- Hosting
- ANN.lu was hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link, mention "ckemp" as referrer and he will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
Please show your appreciation for any past, present and future work on ANN.lu by making a contribution via PayPal.
|