Version 1.5.11 - Translations

The latest news about Gargoyle

Moderator: Moderators

BashfulBladder
Moderator
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by BashfulBladder »

Eric wrote:The portion of the license you claim ispyisail is violating
Oh, I'm not saying its ONLY ispyisail - I am saying Eric: you too are in violation of the GPL.

No where on the download page is even a hint of license.
User downloads Gargoyle.
User sees no license, no terms, no rights.
User has to install firmware to even see about page.

That is really what the GPL says to you? And those GPL packages that are included within Gargoyle - no mention of them need be made & their licensing terms are none of anyone's concern.

So lets pick ffmpeg's libavcodec. You think that when it is compiled with the GPL flags, that absolutely nothing has to be done when you or OpenWrt redistribute the binary? Or build into an image. NOTHING? Just bundle up the libraries, install - no other requirements? The users don't need to know their rights as there are none to convey - right?

And those packages with binary redistribution clauses - more things to be ignored?

You don't even have to answer - current practices say it all.

This page may come as a surprise then: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resource ... ation.html

I'll just wrap it up with a bedrock principle of licensing is the user knowing what rights they have. If the user doesn't know there are any, something went very wrong.

You feel you are in compliance. And Compliance would tear you multiple new ones after they freaked out.
TP-Link WDR3600 v1.1 running 1.5.10+ L10n-English (Built 20130922 - OpenWrt r38093)
TP-Link WDR4300 running 1.5.10+ i18n-English (Built 20131010 - OpenWrt r38286)

https://github.com/BashfulBladder/gargoyle-plugins/wiki

ispyisail
Moderator
Posts: 5180
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:15 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by ispyisail »

Oh, I'm not saying its ONLY ispyisail - I am saying Eric: you too are in violation of the GPL.
What changes would you like to see for compliance?

You may or may not be correct but either way I think its getting a little pedantic when you see others who are far more questionable with GPL

Gargoyle XFTA
Google Android
Ubiquiti Networks
etc

mangus
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 6:24 am

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by mangus »

Succesfully upgraded my wndr3700v2 , all seems fine.
New features are really cool and the dark theme is great.
Thanks to all involved in this amazing project :D

Eric
Site Admin
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:14 pm

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by Eric »

bashful: I wish you had merely raised this point with me first, rather than ispyisail. Given that ispyisail is compliant to exactly the same degree I am, and he isn't in a position to make changes to the main sections of this site which you are criticizing, as I am... addressing him first seems rather silly and unproductive.

You make a good point that it makes sense to include a notice that Gargoyle is released under the GPL on the download page. This has now been addressed (see the first paragraph of the source code section). However, the GPL is unclear about where the license information needs to be displayed for it to be considered compliant. The documentation section and the about section of this site have always made the license terms clear -- it's not exactly a secret. Here is the relevant language from Section (1) of the GPLv2:
You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program.
Just what constitutes "conspicuously and appropiately publish[ing]" a copy of the license? I think you could argue that including a description of this license and a link to it in each copy of the software in the System/About section, along with the details on the main website found on the About page, constitute conspicuous and appropriate publication.

Also, let's consider Debian, for a moment shall we? To the best of my knowledge the Debian Linux distribution is considered one of the most stringent in terms of compliance with open source licensing requirements. When I visit their home page I do see a link to their definition of free software, which in turn links to several common licenses. However, there isn't a detailed break-down of per-package licenses there. No one does this. Likewise, there is no link regarding license of the downloaded software on their download page -- the tiny license link at the bottom only pertains to the license of the code for the website. I am reluctant to put a lot of effort into providing per-package license documentation beyond the standards being set by the leaders in the free software community.

Of course, if you want to spear-head this project, by all means... you can create a detailed wiki page about the license of each package, which can be linked where appropriate. But that will take a lot of work...

I think ispyisail, above hits the nail on the head: There ARE real violators of the GPL out there, not distributing their modified source with their binaries. That is a MUCH bigger problem than how conspicuously license documentation is being displayed. If you want to start a crusade for license compliance, I suggest you start there.

Bajramo
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 3:56 am

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by Bajramo »

Eric wrote:ispyisail: DON'T STOP POSTING BUILDS. It is much appreciated!
+1

ispyisail
Moderator
Posts: 5180
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:15 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by ispyisail »


Wisse
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 6:19 am

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by Wisse »

I've got very minor cosmetic bug to report.
WAN (PPPoE) uptime timer seems to overflow when it's really low or possibly not connected:

Code: Select all

WAN (PPPoE) Uptime:4680 days, 20 hours, 23 minutes
First number that shows correctly is:

Code: Select all

WAN (PPPoE) Uptime:0 days, 0 hours, 0 minutes
I'm not bothered at all by this. I've just reported it mostly out of boredom. Feel free to ignore it.

nieroster
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 10:56 am

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by nieroster »

Tor was removed from the binary package. But after the update, attempting to preserve settings, I still have the menu entry Connections/Tor. When clicking on it Gargoyle jumps to Status/Overview.

On my WNDR3700 it does not let me install Tor anyway because of memory restrictions, how can I remove the menu entry?

Regards,
nieroster

ispyisail
Moderator
Posts: 5180
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:15 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by ispyisail »

attempting to preserve settings
Sometimes it doesn't work

reflash with default, then program

shovon
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 2:01 pm
Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh

Re: Version 1.5.11 - Translations

Post by shovon »

1.5.11 failed on D-Link DIR-615 v.E4 router.

I was using Gargoyle 1.5.10 on my D-Link DIR-615 v.E4 without any problem. Wifi was pretty good and flawless too. Then I decided to try 1.5.11 update. Installation was successful without preserve settings. I configured and enabled wireless in router, that was fine too. But when I rebooted the router, all configuration was lost and router reverted back to its' original gargoyle settings. Then I configured the router again, but no luck. It runs fine as long as I don't reboot the router. The router resets its' configuration while it reboots.

I re-flashed my router with 1.5.10 factory firmware again, and it's working fine without any single problem.

Post Reply