20-Apr-2024 04:54 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 42 items in your selection
[Files] 68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 releasedANN.lu
Posted on 22-Mar-2004 16:54 GMT by whoosh42 comments
View flat
View list
view + print current PS and PDF docs on any 68020 OS3.0 compatible Amiga eg A1200, A4000, Amithlon, WinUAE, Morphos, OS4, print via Turboprint in truecolour if you have Turboprint, view in truecolour via graphics card and 262144 colour HAM8 via AGA. CLICK FOR DOWNLOAD SITE GS813 was the current version of AFPL Ghostscript when I begun in mid February, however 1 week later it wasnt current!

Its an updating of my port of AFPL Ghostscript 8.00 which was released last summer,

It has absolutely minimal requirements: OS3.0, 68020, If you have graphics card it will make full use of this via cybergraphics.library and if you have Turboprint it will make full use of this.

If you just have AmigaOS printer it will print in 12 bitplane 4096 colour via this.

Later in the year I may try and do an update that is current at time of release: future version transitions should happen much faster.

It is noixemul and there is both a 68020-fpu version and a 68020-nofpu version, some 68040's cannot use an FPU and so require the nofpu version.

GS813 requires a full new install and can be run in parallel to GS800, it has a new assign GS813Resource: and requires more fonts than GS800.

The install is easier than for GS800 eg I have merged all the required fonts into 1 archive,

GS will also convert PDF + PS to png, jpeg and a lot of other formats such as fax formats,

68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 1 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Michael Merkel on 22-Mar-2004 19:01 GMT
thanks for this port, whoosh!
works like a charm.

byebye...
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 2 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Gregg on 22-Mar-2004 19:04 GMT
Looks like you've put a lot of work into this - thanks.

By the way, what does "AFPL" stand for, and where is it, please? If the answers are in the archives, I apologise - can't get at them at the mo'.

Gregg
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 3 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 22-Mar-2004 20:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (Gregg):
Aladdin Free Public License.

Basically, they release new versions as AFPL and retire/relax/rerelease them to GNU GPL (see here) when they have a new release to AFPL and sell commercially. This somehow this helps them make money.

[Note that, practically, the AFPL allows just about everything the GPL does *except* distribution as a value-add to a commercial product; in effect, this means OS distributors and "How to Use Ghostscript"-book publishers have to pay the commercial price to include the latest and greatest, as does anyone who wants to use the code outside of the GPL. Dizzying, but it seems to be tolerated by everyone, and was pretty progressive back when things were first released. No idea if any commercial Linux distributions have taken them up on it, but it's their right to keep the option open, and works out for what the product is. (The Postscript API doesn't change, GS just keeps 'getting better' at rendering it; wouldn't be a very hot licensing model for, say, an OS.)]
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 4 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by whoosh on 22-Mar-2004 20:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (Gregg):
@Gregg,

AFPL==Aladdin Free Public License,

see GS813:doc/PUBLIC within archive
gs813doc.lha,

they arent happy with the GNU license so
they constructed their own one,

its very complicated to understand,
took me over 1 day to properly understand it,


AFPL is like some complicated recursive programming,


to conform to it and maximise my rights my
contribution (several months work, mainly done for GS8)
is "AFPL whoosh"!, I effectively had to "port" their
license into my license!


The default course of action is AFPL Ghostscript
but you then surrender your © (I think),


most people take the default path, as with all contracts
its wise to read the small print very carefully,
contracts + licenses always maximise the position of the
drafter of the contract (who else?)


AFPL is a cell-concept, you either join their cell
== AFPL Ghostscript or you form your own cell
which is what I did,


AFPL Ghostscript is always ahead of GNU Ghostscript,


AFPL Ghostscript are dedicated to accurately keeping up
to date with Adobe's specification of PS and PDF,

thus AFPL GS enables you to print + view current docs
you may download, eg it will deal with encryption and other
obstacles,


The Postscript trademark is owned by Adobe,
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 5 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 22-Mar-2004 21:14 GMT
Thanks for a great port!

Would it be possible to add some kind of antialias to the rendered window output? Would be really nice.
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 6 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 22-Mar-2004 22:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (whoosh):
The default course of action is AFPL Ghostscript
but you then surrender your © (I think),

Unless you're SCO, you can't assert 'copyright' for those parts of it you agree to waive under the terms of a license.

So when you modify the AFPL GS, I'd say you keep your copyright, but you're required to waive portions of it (the parts that let you take profit, mostly) to comply with the license, and obviously the whole of your work can't be licensed less restrictively than the AFPL, because you've waived your chance to do that by agreeing to their license to use their code.

Haven't looked at your license, but if you aren't breaking any rules, it can probably simplify to "(c) Whoosh!. Portions of this software are (c) Aladdin and are used under the terms of the AFPL. Use of all or part of this software requires agreement to the terms of the AFPL, and the conditions listed below:
"[$MY_EVEN_MORE_RESTRICTIVE_LICENSE]"

This leaves a headache for everyone else, but you can save that for a FAQ where it doesn't have to be written to legal perfection.* I assume Aladdin are also happy to answer "Is this cool with you?" questions, which is what really counts -- even more than the opinion of a lawyer, if you keep copies of that correspondence! (They're the copyrightholders, if they agree to let you 'abuse' their license somehow, that's going to severely limit their case in the unlikely event they'd ever take you to court.)

*I am not a lawyer. A good lawyer could probably make it even shorter.
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 7 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Cluke on 23-Mar-2004 09:02 GMT
Looks like you've done a lot of work on this. Well done!!
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 8 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by framiga on 23-Mar-2004 10:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (whoosh):
GREAT work whoosh!

i'll try it soon :-)

Ciao
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 9 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 23-Mar-2004 12:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (framiga):
So It's violates his own license, please release the source code at all...
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 10 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Gregg on 23-Mar-2004 12:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
Thanks for the APL info., "Floid", and whoosh too.

Gregg
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 11 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 23-Mar-2004 13:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Gregg):
APL is things, at least. ;)
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 12 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 23-Mar-2004 13:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Gregg):
APL is things, at least.

I even left off the trailing slash in the first URL, this time. Okay, no more multiple links on one line...
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 13 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Gregg on 23-Mar-2004 13:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
Bah!

'F' you!

All in the best possible taste, of course.

Gregg
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 14 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 23-Mar-2004 13:24 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Gregg):
APL is {less than}A HREF="http://www.faqs.org/faqs/apl-faq"{greater than}one{less than}/A{greater than} of two {less than}A HREF="http://aweb.sunsite.dk/license.html"{greater than}things{less than}/A{greater than}, at least.

The last attempt used entities...
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 15 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 23-Mar-2004 13:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Gregg):
You're welcome. Now, before I go to do the smart thing and check the generated source, is this my browser, or are you seeing things as screwed up as I am?
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 16 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Gregg on 23-Mar-2004 13:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
Let's see if I can redeem myself :

APL is one
of two
things, at least.

How did I do?

Gregg
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 17 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 23-Mar-2004 13:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
Ah, okay, everything between the first A HREF tag and the last /A on a line has its <>s converted to entities, I had a feeling I should've remembered that, now to explain one more 'interesting' construct in the "mainstream" thread that got munged by that...
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 18 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Gregg on 23-Mar-2004 13:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
I think the secret is to use all lower case in the HTML; looks like you had a couple of /A's in there, which screwed your pooch (metaphorically speaking).

Are we done yet?

Gregg
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 19 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 23-Mar-2004 13:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Gregg):
Well, given what the bug is, I doubt it, but this will serve as ultimate proof either way, and doesn't demand response. Tags are lowercase, no splitting by line. (IIRC, only XHTML is case sensitive by spec, right?)

things.
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 20 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 23-Mar-2004 13:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Gregg):
(Why yes, I did leave off the text before the first link on that try, thank you for noticing.)
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 21 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by whoosh on 23-Mar-2004 14:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
@Joe "Floid" Kanowitz,

The © issue that matters for me is
that I have parallel ownership of source files entirely
written by me. I want to be able to reuse these files away
from GS eg I have written my own convenient standalone API for
printing via Turboprint and AmigaOS printer

AFPL permit anyone to customise their license in 3 places
which they carefully delineate:

the product, the author, the country,
for AFPL Ghostscript these 3 things refer to:
Ghostscript, Artofcode (I think), USA,

other clauses may not be changed,

this is the sense in which it is a cell,
its almost like a virus!

this is how I end up with AFPL whoosh,

thus if someone customises AFPL whoosh its the same as if
they customise AFPL Ghostscript,

Can you explain further what the purpose of AFPL is
from their POV?

What exactly are they trying to allow + prevent?

you said something about commercial products connected to
AFPL Ghostscript have to pay them to do this,

do you know how much their commercial license costs?

digressing a bit, with mortgages the adverts often say
"interest rates may go up or down",

why do they say this?

if they didnt say this what would happen?

whoosh
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 22 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by whoosh on 23-Mar-2004 14:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (framiga):
@framiga,

I remember you posting when GS8 was released last July!

I want to try and keep this port generally up to date,

I found it required a lot of energy to begin on the
transition GS8 to GS813, somehow its very daunting,
once I got started then I made steady progress,

I dread what new changes they may have brought in!

change is always demoralising even when its positive,

whoosh
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 23 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 23-Mar-2004 15:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (whoosh):
The © issue that matters for me is
that I have parallel ownership of source files entirely
written by me. I want to be able to reuse these files away
from GS eg I have written my own convenient standalone API for
printing via Turboprint and AmigaOS printer

You'll notice their license doesn't say anything about 'ownership.' That's because they can't easily demand ownership of your work.

See, they offer a work. In the US, creating the work automatically gives them copyright on it. Then they 'open up' their copyright by offering licensing. When you create a derivative work, you get copyright over that whole derivative work, but the terms of the agreement that let you derive from it in the first place limit the terms of distribution you can offer on the whole thing (without getting sued).

If you make a tree solely out of the code *you* have written, then you shouldn't held by their terms for distribution of that tree. (This could technically include rewriting from the ground up, as Berkeley did with UNIX, but in today's world someone can throw the DMCA at such things and confuse a judge into making it apply.)

Some companies, like Sun, ask you to waive those authorial rights if you want to submit a patch to their tree (effectively 'signing over the copyright' to Sun, but copyright is a right to set terms, not an 'object' you can transfer like a trademark, so what you're actually doing is 'exercising your copyright' to give those rights to let Sun claim copyright over your work, and give away that right for yourself! ;)) ... Since you never transfer anything *to* Artofcode when creating and distributing a derivative work, they can't claim anything over the code you yourself have added; they can just claim their terms on the code they gave to you.

Licenses are not a 'problem' until someone contests them... But when someone does, it certainly creates bad blood if software was mislicensed too openly and has since spread under those terms (or mislicensed too restrictively, and profit was made where it shouldn't have). Pragmatically, it's actually less important to "be correct" than to "avoid going to court," unless you actually have a reason to make a stand on principle. The above is one argument a lawyer could make in court, and it has a good foundation in law, so there's a good chance a judge would agree. Another argument could be "Waah! Copyright is property ownership! All use is theft!," and if you're SCO or the RIAA, you can try that one and maybe get lucky.

AFPL permit anyone to customise their license in 3 places
which they carefully delineate:

the product, the author, the country,
for AFPL Ghostscript these 3 things refer to:
Ghostscript, Artofcode (I think), USA,

This is poor wording on their part. As I read it, they're saying you can reproduce the text of their license (itself a 'work' of sorts) for totally independent work -- if you want to follow their model for your own project -- just by changing those lines.

It's a red herring if you want to derive work from AFPL Ghostscript, since if you change those words around, you're no longer referring to Aladdin/Artofcode, and thus aren't obviously following the terms of their license, which demand, in part, things like disclaimer of warranty from them.

other clauses may not be changed,

this is the sense in which it is a cell,
its almost like a virus!

So's the GPL.

this is how I end up with AFPL whoosh,

thus if someone customises AFPL whoosh its the same as if
they customise AFPL Ghostscript,

Those are the terms you have to follow if you want to use their code under the AFPL, yes.

Can you explain further what the purpose of AFPL is
from their POV?

What exactly are they trying to allow + prevent?

Er, ask them, I don't represent them. They seem to want to let individuals willing to put up with some hassle use (and be able to patch) the software, but get paid by the sort of people who should have the money to pay.

you said something about commercial products connected to
AFPL Ghostscript have to pay them to do this,

They say it, the FAQ is on their site.

do you know how much their commercial license costs?

Ask them, they have email, and they aren't likely to snipe at someone trying to offer the software free-under-AFPL-terms to a 'suffering platform.' ;)

(Commercial licensing for one project shouldn't touch the licensing of another project, but you'd probably want to keep all your work AFPL-clean -- in terms of commenting your patches and so on -- to avoid reinventing wheels between projects.)

digressing a bit, with mortgages the adverts often say
"interest rates may go up or down",

why do they say this?

if they didnt say this what would happen?

Because there are either laws that say "If a mortgage vendor gives that warning, damages are capped at $N," or legal precedents that suggest "If a mortgage vendor doesn't give that warning, people have successfully sued for $X, we better try something to head that off." It could also be required by their insurer or a business organization (looks like there's a National Association of Mortgage Bankers and a Mortgage Bankers Association) demanding standards of its members.
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 24 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 23-Mar-2004 15:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
It'd help if I read what I typed; words rewritten to mean something:

(effectively 'signing over the copyright' to Sun, but copyright is a right to set terms, not an 'object' you can transfer like a trademark, so what you're actually doing is 'exercising your copyright' to give those rights to Sun, allow them to claim copyright over your work, and deny that right to yourself! ;))
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 25 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 23-Mar-2004 16:21 GMT
Ah well, instead of discussing Licence Problems, got anyone printing work under MOS?
I allready have copied the gs_handler + ps mountlist from my Amiga, but it seems not to work here...
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 26 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by tokai on 23-Mar-2004 17:20 GMT
@whoosh:

where can i get the full source with all parts? We would like to build a full morphos native binary release out of this ghostscript version. Thanks for info.

regards,
tokai
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 27 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by whoosh on 24-Mar-2004 00:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (tokai):
@tokai,


first see if you can get the 68k version to function
properly on Morphos in answer to @Anonymous,


ie if the 68k binary doesnt function on Morphos the
port also wont function,


so we may need to debug the 68k version first for Morphos,
once its functioning correctly on Morphos
in particular: -sDEVICE=tp1, tp8, tp24, whoosh1, whoosh8, whoosh24
need to be functioning,


then I will organise the source to send to you for a
native compile as it stands at that point,


we have to do it this way because I have had a lot of
time wasted by a certain someone who would not actually
ever try out the program but demanded the source code which
I then spent 3 weeks getting into shape for him and then sent,
he never said thank you, didnt even reply to the sending
then eventually told me he wasnt interested in the source
and was generally very rude,


so it is a matter of courtesy and procedure
to try out the prog and like it before you request the source,


otherwise its like the kid who wants all the biggest and best
toys in the shop but never actually plays with them once
they have been bought,


so:

1. visit the above URL,

2. Install the 68k version following the instructions to the letter,

3. do the startup commands to the letter,

it is absolutely essential that all assigns are in place:
GS813: GS813Fonts: GS813Data: GS813Resource:
and a large stack setting,

so eg if GS813Resource: is not assigned the prog will not run,

4. Try the program out, in particular the following devices
need to be got functioning before considering a port:

tp1, tp8, tp24, whoosh1, whoosh8, whoosh24,

5. At this point contact me by email telling me
precisely which of the above 6 devices functioned or didnt function,

6. We then debug the program if necessary,

7. I then prepare the source + instructions and send these to you,


If you ask some couple if you can marry their daughter make sure you've met
her first and that you are really sure that you could live with her
for several decades, because she may turn out to be a witch from
hell central!


GS is my daughter IYSWIM!


Now in theory you can demand the source in which case I will send you
it but you will be on your own. ie if you exercise your maximum rights
I will exercise my minimum obligations,


the choice is up to you,


Now either way, tomorrow and Thursday are very busy for me with
non computer things: major repair work, some builders may or may
not be turning up early tomorrow morning,


and it will take me at least an afternoon to prepare the material,


I have a not quite up to date snapshot of GS813 which is what I
was referring to in the earlier postings and which is also what
I sent to the aforementioned email super troll, but really I need to
construct and send a current snapshot.


I have also promised various people various things who are ahead
of you in the queue eg I promised my mum I would look up some
complicated flights via the internet on Sunday and I havent done this
yet. I also promised on another forum that I would upload material
on how to convert ps to pdf,


it will also take you a day to organise the source before you can
even begin a recompile, GS is a painful program,


so anyway, I cannot promise that anything will reach you till possibly Sunday,


note that most people take at least a week to reply to emails if at all,
so this delay is within acceptible margin of error,


For no.5 above this is the direct way to use say tp24 and whoosh24:

GS813:bin/gs -sDEVICE=tp24 -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE GS813:examples/tiger.eps

this is supposed to print out the tiger in truecolour,

similarly

GS813:bin/gs -sDEVICE=whoosh24 -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE GS813:examples/tiger.eps

is supposed to view the tiger in truecolour,


to @Anonymous as well:

please try and get the program running via shell usage before you
try it via PS: and Turboprefs,

if you cannot get it running via the shell then you have no chance
by any other means,

it is possible that the PS: mechanism has been changed after Turboprint
became part of Morphos. Try running:

SnoopDOS -f -w -l -zcon:

in parallel to trying to use GS or PS:,

this may help reveal where the problem is,


the above URL has complete examples of all the main usages,


the homepage has been carefully constructed,
if you cannot get GS813 to run then send me
the shell output of your attempts,

setenv whooshquiet 0
setenv whooshv 1

will maximise the shell output of my viewers so this will
be useful to help me fix things, that is if you send this
shell output!


so please spend perhaps 2 afternoons studying the webpage,
there is a lot of learning curve for GS, you wont learn it in 5 minutes,
its a very eccentric program, for a start the order of the arguments is
critical, GS processes arguments in left to right order and
so if the order is slightly wrong nothing will happen. So try out
the examples on the webpage verbatim.


So far I have had lots of feedback for 68030, 68040, 68060, Amithlon,
WinUAE, even one person with I think WarpOS he said 68k runs fine but
requested I do a WarpOS port. I said no plans for this, maybe but
no promises, not keen on legacy ports outside of 68k,
I then asked him as a first step to find out about
WarpOS gcc2.95.3-4 for me and he never did,



Now *nobody* at all has sent me proper feedback for Morphos or OS4,


zero, diddly squat,


this program has been out since last July,
and I have begged for OS4 and Morphos feedback
and *nobody* has sent it,


A few Morphos people have contacted me but never replied to my
requests for feedback, eg "what happens when you run the viewers on Morphos?",
question always ignored, can you send me a jpeg screenshot of the viewers?,
ignored. I even ask them like I am asking you now if they will be the
first Morphos person to send me proper feedback!


Nobody from OS4 at all has contacted me, maybe OS4 doesnt exist!
those screenshots are probably just 68k gfx cards or just UAE?


so please try to be the first Morphos person to send me feedback
before you ask for the source,


I think this is a reasonable request,


If you follow all of the above we may actually get a decent port to
Morphos,

procedure + correct sequencing pre-empts timewasting,


Harsh but fair,


whoosh
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 28 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 24-Mar-2004 07:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (whoosh):
"Now *nobody* at all has sent me proper feedback for Morphos or OS4,"

This poll result might explain that

68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 29 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 24-Mar-2004 07:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (whoosh):
"Now *nobody* at all has sent me proper feedback for Morphos or OS4,"

This poll result might explain that

<a href="http://www.amiga.org/modules/
xoopspoll/pollresults.php?poll_id=70"></a>
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 30 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 24-Mar-2004 07:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Don Cox):
It seems a link will only work if it all fits on one line in the textarea.
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 31 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 24-Mar-2004 12:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (whoosh):
Now in theory you can demand the source in which case I will send you
it but you will be on your own. ie if you exercise your maximum rights
I will exercise my minimum obligations,

Note that this is no attempt to be rude (and I, at least, can appreciate what a sheer pain in the _$$ all this work must be), but in handling it this way, you are in violation of the terms they've granted it to you:

(iv)
You must accompany the Work with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, delivered on a medium customarily used for software interchange. The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable code. If you distribute with the Work any component that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, you must also distribute the source code of that component if you have it and are allowed to do so;

...It honestly would be a lot "safer," "better," and "less pain-inducing" all around to get your sources in order before you declare and publish the release. Right now you're trying to do right by the scene and put it up as soon as it runs, but all that gets you is the 'whiners' anyway.

[To fit with the terms of the license, sounds like you can get by running a diff against whichever version(s) you started from, and count all those pesky dates of modification as the date of release, when your "patchset" was "applied" -- so the process could probably be automated entirely if you're willing to slide with "Patch for Amiga compatibility" as the commented 'purpose' for all your changes. ;)]
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 32 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 24-Mar-2004 12:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 31 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
Note that the AFPL does not preserve the cop-outs of GPL 3.b or 3.c.

Fun, isn't it? :P
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 33 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Bladerunner on 24-Mar-2004 13:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (whoosh):
ah, well i actually *did* sent you a mail yesterday, It even contained G813&Morph OS Problems in the Headline.
So well at least me has given you feedback, via E-mail and no reply. Not that I expected
it very soon, because i thought you might be very busy with response, but than you are stating, that no MorphOS
User made a report.. hmmm strange...
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 34 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 24-Mar-2004 15:53 GMT
@Whoosh:

Thanks for all the hard work you have put into Ghostscript. :)


REQUEST

If you have looked into the PDF reader "APDF" you might have seen
that it has Anti-aliasing for text, strokes and fills. I was just
wondering whether it would be possible to implement this into
the 16-bit+ screen/window viewers.

I have no idea how one would code anti-aliasing, but it would
certainly make text a lot easier to read, and of course also
make it prettier.

At the same time, I do understand that your port may be targeted
more at printing than viewing.

Thanks for your time :)
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 35 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by whoosh on 24-Mar-2004 20:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Don Cox):
@Don Cox, re poll,

30 for OS4, maybe they are the 30 OS4 developers!


BTW I have received now several emails from Morphos
users trying GS813 + Turboprint,

there seem to be some problems so I am looking into this,
possibly the PS: mechanism doesnt function as-is for
Morphos-Turboprint. Anyway I have asked people to try various
things including
SnoopDOS -f -w -l -zcon:

which hopefully may reveal what the system is trying to do,

I will document progress on this on the website under
"new developments ..."

ie

www.whoosh777.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk#newfeatures

I wonder when someone will send some GS8 or GS813
viewer feedback from Morphos,


this feedback is giving me a different perspective on things,
as feedback usually has been from 68k and PC users,


once such problems are resolved then we can look into
a port to Morphos if that is what is wanted,


The builders I mentioned will be appearing tomorrow + Friday so
I have a bit more time today than I thought but less time Friday,
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 36 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by whoosh on 24-Mar-2004 20:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 31 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
@Joe "Floid" Kanowitz,


possibly I have misunderstood the license, I thought
it was enough to email the source on request but
maybe I am confusing this with some other license,


it will take some days for me to do this, but I will
try to get the source onto the website during next
week at the latest, I will see if I can get it
there by Wednesday,


there are some contradictions in their license in
that GS source is always supplied incomplete:


jpeg, png, zlib, are never supplied,

thus it is impossible to generate the program
if you download the source from their own links,


:this was one of the mystifying things about GS510,
I downloaded the source but couldnt compile it
because jpeg etc were missing,
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 37 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by whoosh on 24-Mar-2004 20:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
@Joe "Floid" Kanowitz

>Note that the AFPL does not preserve the cop-outs of GPL 3.b or 3.c.
>
>Fun, isn't it? :P

but there is a further twist:

AFPL Ghostscript allows you to supply your
code under GPL,
they only tell you this on their website, click on the
licensing link,



so those cop outs are available!
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 38 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by whoosh on 24-Mar-2004 21:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (Bladerunner):
@Bladerunner


>ah, well i actually *did* sent you a mail yesterday, It even contained
>G813&Morph OS Problems in the Headline.
>So well at least me has given you feedback, via E-mail and no reply. Not
>that I expected
>it very soon, because i thought you might be very busy with response, but
>than you are stating, that no MorphOS
>User made a report.. hmmm strange...

I didnt get the opportunity to read my emails till this afternoon,
and only read this post of yours just now 955pm,

so I think I am experiencing synchronisation problems,

your email must have been one of the ones I replied to this afternoon,

I replied to all emails that arrived,


the internet is like this, you say something and the exact opposite
manifests itself,

my first attempt to visit this thread today invalidated my
internet partition, after that each visit crashed the machine,
I eventually got through by viewing it in threaded format,

have to figure out what to do about that partition,
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 39 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 24-Mar-2004 22:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 37 (whoosh):
Merging two posts here:

possibly I have misunderstood the license, I thought
it was enough to email the source on request but
maybe I am confusing this with some other license,

Unfortunately, I think you are. (Again, no malice intended, but what they specify is pretty clear.)

there are some contradictions in their license in
that GS source is always supplied incomplete:

jpeg, png, zlib, are never supplied,

thus it is impossible to generate the program
if you download the source from their own links,

The text that applies (or doesn't) here:

"If you distribute with the Work any component that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, you must also distribute the source code of that component if you have it and are allowed to do so;"

The libs aren't "normally distributed with [...] the operating system" in our case, so you aren't held to that. If they get linked in statically... that's a good question, but their licenses all seem to allow that sort of inclusion. In this case, I'd ask Ghostscript.com what the heck they meant... and they'd probably base their interpretation on how available zlib/libjpeg/libpng are for Amiga otherwise. (If they didn't require modification, you've got a good excuse to say "Well, people can just get the main branch of the code." If they did require modification, ethics sort of obliges you to pass them along.)

but there is a further twist:

AFPL Ghostscript allows you to supply your
code under GPL,
they only tell you this on their website, click on the
licensing link,

Sorry, I'm going to have to call that a misinterpretation:

If your application, including all of its source code, is licensed to the public under the AFPL or the GNU GPL, you are authorized to ship AFPL Ghostscript or GPL Ghostscript, respectively, with your application under the terms of those license agreements.

If you honestly read that as "you can pick AFPL or GPL for the AFPL version," well, I don't think that's what they meant, and ignoring that, it's not what the license you've agreed to actually says. ;} You can claim (and I think you have, if I remember the last time everyone tried to sort out of the AFPL) that, since the copyright-holder wrote that, it constitutes permission to pick before you even get to the AFPL, but everything else they've written goes against that, and besides, that's mean; you want your licenses respected, right?

(Sentiment behind the AFPL is expressed here.)

If you want, I can try to track down someone on their team and get the external-lib ambiguity sorted out, but I'm not about to go starting crap behind anyone's back here, and I imagine they'd react unfavorably to seeing a binary-only distribution of the AFPL product making the rounds.

---

Meanwhile, a quick Google shows they are a little protectionist of existing commercial arrangements... but more like they want to get paid per-seat (versus, y'know, risking selling it once for $50 to someone who could then GPL it), like we see with the DE_on_Pegasos Catch-22.
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 40 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 24-Mar-2004 22:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
Just when I thought I could break the cycle, an extra 'of' snuck in there:

(and I think you have, if I remember the last time everyone tried to sort out the AFPL)
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 41 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 24-Mar-2004 22:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 37 (whoosh):
Oh yeah, and you could provide solely a GPL'd patchset that applies to independently-acquired AFPL Ghostscript, but that's a recipe that would prevent anyone from distributing the combination, source or binary. Not very useful here. :}
68k AFPL Ghostscript 8.13 released : Comment 42 of 42ANN.lu
Posted by Cluke on 24-Mar-2004 23:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
Some good points here, but I would hate to think of some poor guy like whoosh getting all frustrated and annoyed by all these people screaming for the source as some sort of point of open-source principle even though they intend to do nothing with it (Just to clarify, I don't mean you Joe! ;-). I would really hate for this to go so far as to make him regret taking on the project in the first place.

And I can see how he has enough pride in his work to want to present it only to people who are not time-wasters, and wants to get it into good shape before sharing it. But I guess these GS guys picked that license for a reason, and its their hard work too. So, whoosh, I think to cover yourself in the meantime, just lha your source directory and stick that on your website too, should be a mere matter of minutes. Sure, release a cleaned up version in the future, but for now that will do and keep the whiners quiet and yourself legal.

Anyway, let none of this take away from the great work you have done.
Anonymous, there are 42 items in your selection
Back to Top