Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Feb 2006 12:22 UTC, submitted by Rahul
X11, Window Managers Updated: Fedora was right in the middle of announcing all this properly, so here is the updated item containing the official names. Videos included, as well as the inevitable 'Why not Xgl?'. "AIGLX is a project that aims to enable GL-accelerated effects on a standard desktop. We have a lightly modified X server (that includes a couple of extensions), an updated Mesa package that adds some new protocol support and a version of metacity with a composite manager. The end result is that you can use GL effects on your desktop with very few changes, the ability to turn it on and off at will, and you don't have to replace your X server in the process." This is part of Fedora's Rendering Project, and instructions on how to install all this are available too.
Thread beginning with comment 97589
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Novell NIH
by manmist on Mon 20th Feb 2006 18:13 UTC
manmist
Member since:
2005-12-18

"
These links http://developer.novell.com/wiki/index.php/Apparmor_FAQ and http://www.novell.com/products/apparmor/overview.html will explain the product better to you. As for your "proprietary add on" comment I've already stated AppArmor is licensed under the Gnu Public License (GPL) and therefore has no licensing fees"

Bull. User space tools are still proprietary. Only the kernel part has been GPL'ed. SELinux is already in the upstream kernel. What about Apparmour?.


"
Well then what you're implying is that information online such as here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XGL where it's stated XGL was released open source 02/02/06 is incorrect."

Incorrect. I am stating a fact that XGL is NOT under GPL but thunder a Xorg license. Looks like you dont understand licensing differences at all. Novell has done XGL under closed door while rest of the vendors working on Xorg cvs directly. Thats what Novell as a proprietary vendor is doing. Playing tricks

Reply Score: 1

RE: Novell NIH
by poofyhairguy on Mon 20th Feb 2006 22:13 in reply to "Novell NIH "
poofyhairguy Member since:
2005-07-14

Novell has done XGL under closed door while rest of the vendors working on Xorg cvs directly. Thats what Novell as a proprietary vendor is doing. Playing tricks

Ahh...so that is why Novell's work is now running on other distros (like Ubuntu) while only Fedora has this new Redhat stuff? Is that why Novell's work didn't enter the Freedesktop CVS ( oh wait, it did)?

Is that why Novell's "tricks" are more stable than the composite work that came before it? Is that why Novell worked with ATI and Nvidia to make it so that the XGL would be fully supported by future driver releases while Redhat only has the open source drivers working (which means no high end hardware can use it)?

Is Novell's "proprietary vendor" why Novell can show RIGHT NOW what DOES WORK in its compositor, while Redhat is mostly talking about "what can be done?"

Then screw it, I prefer the Novell approach. And so do thousands of others that have been messing around on the other forums (such as Gentoo's and Ubuntu) to get XGL to work, while almost no forum has a thread to get the Metacity compositor to work.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Novell NIH
by sarnold on Tue 21st Feb 2006 19:40 in reply to "Novell NIH "
sarnold Member since:
2006-02-21

Manmist, I work on the AppArmor product team in Novell's SUSE Labs.

All AppArmor code is released under the GPL or LGPL: http://forge.novell.com/modules/xfcontent/downloads.php/apparmor/De...

This includes the logprof/genprof profile generation tools. This includes the YaST GUI front end. This includes the report generation tools. Everything.

What you may be thinking of is the AppArmor integrated into SUSE Linux 10.0 and SLES9 Service Pack 3; these were released before AppArmor tools were GPL'd, and were thus released under the older proprietary license. We plan on releasing an update for SLES9SP3 and SL10.0 in the future to relicense the files and packages, but CODE10 development has taken priority.

The AppArmor team also plans to submit the kernel module for inclusion in kernel.org kernels. However, six years of development without concerted cleanup efforts along the way requires time to "clean up" to he kernel's high standards.

Edited 2006-02-21 19:50

Reply Parent Score: 3