Lycoris has released the download edition of Update 3, their third major version of their distro. Paying customers had access to it a month ago. Currently, not all mirrors are rsynced while the dev tools CD and source code haven’t being uploaded as of yet.
Lycoris Releases Download Edition of Update 3
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
It most take 7 hours to update an ISO right lycoris that is why your naming scheme is has no room for more files and the MD5sums only list:
d38ac6b2c0510c990e1cafad34e1e6f5 update3.iso
They are under no obligation to put source on an FTP.
Considering the type of people who use Lycoris, its no surprise they don’t.
It had a clean interface, nice intergration, and was extremly fast(faster than debian and slackware!)
The only problem I had was the severly outdated packages.
Yes they are. The GPL requires sources to be provided.
lycoris, along with xandros, are my favorite desktop os distros. now they are superior to winxp, and in another year it won’t even be close.
great job guys, keep up the good work!
“lycoris, along with xandros, are my favorite desktop os distros. now they are superior to winxp”
Probably feeding a troll here, but I’d be leery of pronouncing Lycoris as simply superior to Windows XP. More robust, certainly. Better hardware support? Unlikely. More applications? Definitely not.
As with a lot of things, it’s mixed.
Yes they are. The GPL requires sources to be provided.
That doesn’t mean you have to have an ftp server. You can send it out by mail, too. Plus I’m sure Lycoris has a bunch of artwork that is not licensed under the GPL, so if someone asked for the source by mail with the intention to distribute it, that person would also have to remove all of the Lycoris logos, icons, etc., and possibly some proprietary tools (I don’t know if Licoris has any or not).
//
Yes they are. The GPL requires sources to be provided.
//
Its only required to be given out by mail, and you are required to write them by mail.
Most people are nice though, and put the sources online.
oh did anyone else notice this jewel in the lincense
eans reproducing, in whole or in part, by any
means, any portion of the Desktop/LX product, and/or giving said reproduction, also known as a “copy” to another person or entity. This includes but is not limited to: downloading, CD copies, copies on computer hard drives, and copies on any removable computer media. This Evaluation copy of Desktop/LX may not de distributed, and must be returned to Lycoris
within 45 days of receipt.
//
Yes they are. The GPL requires sources to be provided.
//
Its only required to be given out by mail, and you are required to write them by mail.
Most people are nice though, and put the sources online.
Well then they have to make the source avablie at cost for 4 years and included a writen notice that states such. They don’t.
“# a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange;# or,
# b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
# c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)”
Says nothing about mail. If they include the sources on the
ISO, that’s acceptable. Otherwise, since they don’t include a written offer, they must provide sources.
I think people are jumping the gun. I get the impression they are in the process of uploading the source and development cds. CD1 only went up a few hours ago.
An unreliable source suggested that they wouldn’t be releasing the development CD. Anyway, it’s pretty much irrelevant as they’re still using KDE2. Why is this so, when everyone else has moved onto KDE3? I find Lycoris to be sluggish in comparison to other distros.
http://www.distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=lycoris
Lycoris does have some dated packages, looking here if you look at the far left column is shows what is current, then next column shows what Lycoris-update-3 has…
I really like this version, but my sound doesn’t work at all. Is this a conspiracy with the whole “Evaluation Edition” theme that’s going on with Update 3? Every time I try to restart the sound server it says:
Error while initializing the sound driver:
device /dev/dsp can’t be opened (No such device)
There is no where you can configure it or change anything and contrary to the error message /dev/dsp DOES exist.
Hey, their dhcp package is current (as is vim)!!!:)
“Error while initializing the sound driver:
device /dev/dsp can’t be opened (No such device) ”
I remeber getting that error back in slackware 9.0.
The problem was my intergrated sound card(AC97) wassent supported.What you need to do is install ASLA( http://alsa-project.org/ ).
Its kinda strange because I think almost ALL popular distros(mdk, rh, gent00, slackware, etc) added this package back in 2002.
Lycoris uses Alsa…..
noname:~$ rpm -q alsa
alsa-0.9.6-127rl
thats what on my system and i dont even have update3 installed yet i still have a beta ver of update3 installed
Re: jumping the gun:
Lycoris will and do have source CDs and Devtools CDs for Update3.
Re: No sources:
There is sources. May not be uploaded yet, but there is sources.
Re: No sound?:
I find it some what hard to believe you would consider thinking that. That error simply means that your sound card is not supported out of the box in Lycoris Update3. Just because there is a /dev/dsp doesnt mean there is a module loaded for your sound card. MAKEDEV creates many /dev/ entries including /dev/dsp.
To all:
I used to be a contributing developer for Lycoris. They are an honest company and not out to stifle anyone. The provide what is required of them under the GPL, no more no less. Yes, some package might be more out of date tan other distros, but Lycoris Desktop/LX was and is by far one of the most stable Linux distros that I have used in a very long time. People have to understand that Lycoris is not after the “bleeding edge” type user. They are targeting Home/End users that want stablity and reliablity. If this means things like KDE2 and you are not happy with that, then Lycoris Desktop/LX is no the distro for you.
Please understand where Lycoris is going with the Linux desktop. They are not out to target power users, developers, bleeding edge types. They want home users and end users who want an OS that is stable and relible.
sorry for my soap box post.
Mike
Well said Mike
How can you provide a stable code base when thousands of fixes have occured in the KDE 3 code base, fixes which will not be backported to KDE 2.2.
Lycoris’s stance on this issue is a joke. On three different occasions, I have tried to install lycoris on a laptop that Mandrake and Red Hat have been able to use for close to three years. Not Lycoris…
I don’t understand who their targetting. It’s install, while quite good, isn’t as thorough and as troublefree as what the main distributions have.
I don’t know of any non-geeky person that install his own OS on a computer and I don’t think the amount of preinstalled machines they sell is so large as to justify their existence, so it really is very hard to believe that they have a niche at all. But then again, from my understanding of things, Lycoris is a 2-man operation, hardly what any serious user would use. I want a distribution that has a larger userbase and that is completely GPLed, so that if the run into financial troubles, other can pick up where they left off.
Lycoris will and do have source CDs and Devtools CDs for Update3.
The way they’ve renamed the CD “update3.iso” seems to suggest that the only way to get the source will be to buy it.
NOTE: This perfectly permissable under the GPL – in fact I think it’s a good thing.
I’m not after bleeding edge; I am after stability, but KDE2 is so far out of date that your argument doesn’t work.
I find it some what hard to believe you would consider thinking that. That error simply means that your sound card is not supported out of the box in Lycoris Update3. Just because there is a /dev/dsp doesnt mean there is a module loaded for your sound card. MAKEDEV creates many /dev/ entries including /dev/dsp.
My sound card not supported? It’s a Soundblaster Live! Value for crying out loud. Works with every other distro, including the beta and earlier versions of Lycoris. Someone help me out here.
My soundcard is a Soundblaster Live! Value. That should be supported out of the box because it is supported by every other distribution out there (including build 46and the betas of Lycoris)Something is screwing with my aRts server or something… Anyone want to give me a hand?
They MUST provide sources, NOT binaries (ISO) !
Re: No sources:
There is sources. May not be uploaded yet, but there is sources.
Thank you captain obvious here I was think that lycoris coded there entire distrubition in binary.
Sure it might be jumping the gun but nothing indecates that lycoris is going to provide the source with out the community forcing them. Monkey you know how there build script works so you know that the default name convection isn’t the being used with update3. You know that they didn’t release the source ISO for build 119 and 127 RC0 and RC1 of update 3. You know that they didn’t release the sources for update 3 with the update wizard so what indicates to you that lycoris has any intention of releasing the source now.
thats is correct.. SRC CDs were not released during the internal and NDA beta testing phases. Whats your point? All source is made to you if you have the product and ask. Naming convention is irrelevent. Source has never been downloadable via update wizard. There _will_ be devtools and source CDs.
Quadu:
OSNEWS isnt a support forum, if you want help with resolving your issues jump over to lycoris.org and ask in the hardware thread
KDE2:
For the last year and a bit KDE2 has worked fine for me… If its not your cup of tea then dont drink it.
The beauty of open source is that _noone_ has a gun to your head telling you to use something _you_ dont not wish too. If you, your mum and the cat next door find Lycoris Desktop/LX isnt for you, thats great there are abunch more others to try. Desktop/LX provided me with an OS I could do what I needed to do.. Its about functionality and usablity.. dressing my KDE install too look like a Mac OS install doesnt rate high on my list of requirements. KDE2 does and still is working fine. Lycoris isnt the only desktop distro still basing their efforts on it.
SO lets turn the blow torches off, move on if Desktop/LX isnt for you and find one that is
thats is correct.. SRC CDs were not released during the internal and NDA beta testing phases. Whats your point? All source is made to you if you have the product and ask. Naming convention is irrelevent. Source has never been downloadable via update wizard. There _will_ be devtools and source CDs.
The point is that they haven’t been living up to the GPL and they didn’t give out the source when asked for RCs and more importantly they didn’t included a writen offer to provide the source. Who do I ask for the Source for update 3 and the RCs that source wasn’t proved but the binary was distruted. What email address should I send my request to.
<quote>
The point is that they haven’t been living up to the GPL and they didn’t give out the source when asked for RCs and more importantly they didn’t included a writen offer to provide the source. Who do I ask for the Source for update 3 and the RCs that source wasn’t proved but the binary was distruted. What email address should I send my request to.
</quote>
Any @lycoris.com address. [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Remember, they dont _have_ to give you the source by default. It seems to be a common misunderstandng of the GPL, that the source must be give away for free (as in no charge) to anyone. They can charge for it (I think on the cost of the media and postage?) and they dont have to provide a link or ftp or rsync etc to get the sources, if you request the source (only the GPL) can be posted to you.
Don’t waste your breath. Some people are just looking for a not to pick. Anyone who is likely to use Lycoris, or even investigate it seriously, knows that they routinely release 2 CDs, teh installation CD, the DevTools CD and the Source CD. I see no reason to think that they will suddenly change course. If they wanted to do anythign like that, the obvisou and logical course would be to start charging for the installation CD, and yet it is stil being offered for free. Some people will gripe no matter what you do, just for the pleasure of griping. I know, I do it myself sometimes.
But I must say, after spending the last few days wrestling with trying to get a copy of Lindows 3.0 upgraded over a dialup connection, Lycoris is looking better and better all the time. I really miss the convenience of the Lycoris upgrade wizard. I Miss it Big Time.
Could someone without an axe to grind, who has downloaded the ISO please set the record straight: is the download a limited version, or is it the same as the purchased version (without an IRIS reg code)? What does the EULA of the downloaded version actually say about this?
Other then the quote I posted above from the lincess file about having to returning the disk it is the same.
If that is the license wording for the download edition, it doesn’t make any sense. It sounds like it was worded for physical evaluation or review copies, not for an ISO that would be downloaded.
well go download the ISO and read it for your self if you don’t think I can copy and past correctly.