On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 07:15 -0400, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 22:41 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 12:18:30PM +1000, Res wrote: > > > > That's not "stripped", that's "can't legally include". > > > BS, if the code producers have a complete package and fedora decide they > > > dont want to or cant for their own internal policy reasons include a part > > > of it, thats STRIPPED, it is STRIPPED code that IS in the > > > correct/real/publicly available TRUE source and binaries released by the > > > code producers. > > > > Again, nothing is stripped gratuitously. If it's not free software, it can't > > be included. > > > > -- > > Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <http://mattdm.org/> > > Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/> > > > > > Kinda funny how Apple doesn't have this kind of bullshit problem and > their version of 'nix is working fine for everybody. Kinda funny how > Red Hat's profits are down by 25% this last quarter and Ubunto continues > to accelerate. For those interested Red Hat's quarterly results are at http://www.redhat.com/about/news/prarchive/2007/fiscal.html Red Hat's profits were not in line with analyst expectations due to (if I read it correctly) adjustments for stock compensation and tax expense. Their revenues were *up* 41% YoY and 5% sequentially and subscriptions *grew* 44% YoY and 8% sequentially. Your suggestion that Red Hat's lower than expected profits means they no longer "accelerate" is obviously wrong. Bottomline is that if it isn't free than it can't be included. If you don't like that then why don't you just use OSX or get another distro that doesn't have "this kind of bullshit problem". Patrick
