|
  |
Pcsxbox... May I Ask... |
|
|
| PeteBernert |
May 11 2003, 08:46 PM
|
X-S Enthusiast
Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 11-May 03
Member No.: 37319

|
may I ask where I can download the source code for the pcsx xbox port?
|
|
|
|
| |
| PeteBernert |
May 12 2003, 03:53 AM
|
X-S Enthusiast
Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 11-May 03
Member No.: 37319

|
Since PCSX is protected by the GPL, the sources of the port have to get released.
If that port is using the P.E.Op.S. gpu and spu sources, which are protected by the GPL, that sources have to get released as well.
If this port is violating the GPL in any way, than I have zero respect for 'xport'.
The nice little statement "Many thanks go out to the authors of the above emulators for making them open-source" on the xport homepage would be like spitting into the faces of all that authors.
CyRUS64, I didn't find any real 'xport' mail address, but I will try to send 'xport' a mail through this messageboard.
|
|
|
|
| |
| PeteBernert |
May 12 2003, 04:15 AM
|
X-S Enthusiast
Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 11-May 03
Member No.: 37319

|
>and has the code readily available
sorry, but that's not good enough. If he releases a port of a GPL protected software, he has either to bundle the complete source codes with the binaries, or he has to point out to the public where to get this sources.
GPL'd Open Source software is not _free to use for whatever comes into your mind_. There are several rules behind it, and either you follow them, or you break them illegaly.
And if 'xport' is breaking them, than I don't care if the xbox scene is hailing him as Jesus reborn, and legal actions could be taken.
|
|
|
|
| |
| Banacek |
May 12 2003, 06:14 AM
|
X-S Young Member

Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 17-November 02
Member No.: 9110

|
| QUOTE (PeteBernert @ May 12 2003, 05:15 AM) | >and has the code readily available
sorry, but that's not good enough. If he releases a port of a GPL protected software, he has either to bundle the complete source codes with the binaries, or he has to point out to the public where to get this sources.
GPL'd Open Source software is not _free to use for whatever comes into your mind_. There are several rules behind it, and either you follow them, or you break them illegaly.
And if 'xport' is breaking them, than I don't care if the xbox scene is hailing him as Jesus reborn, and legal actions could be taken. |
Kind of judging him before he even gets a chance to defend himself.
From the GPL:
| QUOTE | | If you wish to incorporate parts of the Program into other free programs whose distribution conditions are different, write to the author to ask for permission. |
And according to LumbraX: (who's post can be found here)
| QUOTE | (At a Friends House)
For those who were wondering what happen to our port, we were stuck on something (forgot what it was) so we asked XPort for help, XPort replied back in 3 days saying that he had taken over the project and ported pcsx himself, so we kept that to ourself until he released it today.
You may even find some games working in the pcsx port XPort did, when our team started the port we got support from the original Author and he gave us a source code for pcsx that hadnt been released yet. (And I sent that source to XPort through PM, not sure if he used it but it looked like he did).....
Awsome work though XPort,
C Everyone when I get back in like 6 days...
|
So am I missing something here?
|
|
|
|
| |
| lucas |
May 12 2003, 11:45 AM
|

X-S Expert
  
Group: Members
Posts: 542
Joined: 30-January 03
From: Melbourne, Australia
Member No.: 21897
Xbox Version: v1.0
360 version: v3.0 (falcon)

|
| QUOTE (NerdENerd @ May 12 2003, 11:17 PM) | | Yeah well people the MS XDK is also protected by licences that have been broken by every port so far, so what are a few GPL violations? They are probably installed on pirate versions of Visual Studio on pirate versions of Windows XP and downloaded to sit on you hard drive next to all the ISO's you have downloaded off the net. So get off you high horse about GPL violations. | the big difference is that the point of GPL is to make better software. if someone takes source and modifies it, they must keep it open to allow others to build on that rather than reinventing the wheel. the point in MS's licenceing is to make money, and lots of it. have a think about which licence benefits the community
|
|
|
|
| |
| MissSplitch |
May 12 2003, 12:13 PM
|

X-S Expert
  
Group: Members
Posts: 526
Joined: 1-April 03
From: Parts Unknown
Member No.: 29562
Xbox Version: v1.1
360 version: v1 (xenon)

|
A GPL-based release structure is great for advancing the project fast, and encouraging competition and such; however when put into an unstructured compilation and execution environment such as this one, having to keep track of who's version everyone is using and troubleshooting the various problems inherent therein without being able to directly point at software to support the tired masses is just foolish.
The "scene" (I use quotes nonpatronizingly, as I just don't like using that word) benefits more from not having to deal with myriad different versions of the same product at this moment more than the benefits of rapid advancement would aid the cause.
Not to harp too much on my Mengele analogy; but the same ideal is case-in-point here: if advancement comes at too large a cost it's no longer advancement. We'd be winning $20 on the nickel slots after blowing our whole paycheck.
It's irrelevant that the point of the GPL is to make better software and the point of MS' license is to make money. Altruism is subjective; to the Nazi's Mengele was doing the right thing by experimenting on Jews in the hopes of gaining knowledge that would aid the Nazi's cause. Now that that knowledge is obtained, what is worse; using it knowing that the ends would justify the means, and thus allow for anyone who happened to be on top at the time to do anything they saw fit to those they felt were inferior, or to have all of the people who were tortured, maimed and killed to gain that knowledge die without it being used?
The source isn't the issue, it's everyone feeling as though this apparent violation has somehow violated their inalienable right to possess shit to dick around with. Let's be honest, even if the source code to this thing never gets released the GPL's basis won't have suffered at all.
I fI might add another obscure analogy to my pile;
if you died tomorrow, how many people would cry?
-Splitch
|
|
|
|
| |
|
  |
|