I've been using povray for many years, through lots of distributions...
and now, having finally downloaded debian ETCH, I find there is
no povray on the CDs.  It was on the old SuSE, and openSuSE, but
not on debian-ETCH.

Hmmm.  Even though Pov-Ray is totally free, debian considers it
"non-free", and, as I said, it is nowhere on the full CD set I
downloaded.

S-oooo... what Im wondering really is if any other debian/etch
povray users may know of an unofficial CD including the non-free
programs for ETCH, with povray of course ?

thanks to anyone who may know

Post a reply to this message

stu <stu### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Hmmm.  Even though Pov-Ray is totally free, debian considers it
> "non-free"

  The Gnu interpretation of the word "free" is not the same as the rest
of the world's interpretation.

  This goes as far as them loudly proclaiming that anything that doesn't
fit inside their definition of "free" is "not free".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

stu wrote:
> I've been using povray for many years, through lots of distributions...
> and now, having finally downloaded debian ETCH, I find there is
> no povray on the CDs.  It was on the old SuSE, and openSuSE, but
> not on debian-ETCH.
> 
> Hmmm.  Even though Pov-Ray is totally free, debian considers it
> "non-free", and, as I said, it is nowhere on the full CD set I
> downloaded.
> 
> S-oooo... what Im wondering really is if any other debian/etch
> povray users may know of an unofficial CD including the non-free
> programs for ETCH, with povray of course ?
> 
> thanks to anyone who may know
> 
Just download the standard Linux version directly from povray.org. 
Un-tar it, then from a command-line terminal, cd to the directory just 
created (povray-3.6 IIRC), and (as root) run ./install

This is all in the README file, of course.  And by installing it as root 
it is installed for all users and this (temporary) install directory can 
be deleted when you're done.

I like to play around with various Linux distros and POV-Ray is usually 
the first thing I install, so I've done this numerous times -- including 
in Debian.  One personal idiosyncrasy -- before deleting this install 
directory, I like to move (or copy) the "scenes" directory to a local 
directory (usually into ~/pov).  This keeps these standard examples 
handy and in a directory where you have write permission.

      -=- Larry -=-

Post a reply to this message

On 23.06. 2008, stu <stu### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Hmmm.  Even though Pov-Ray is totally free, debian considers it
> "non-free",

As Warp already said, this stems from the dual meanings of "free": 
when talking about "free" in relation to software, the FOSS crowd 
typically means "free as in speech" and not "free as in beer". The 
Debian category "free" in particular pretty much excludes everything 
that's not distributed under GPL, BSD, or similar license.

> and, as I said, it is nowhere on the full CD set I
> downloaded.

If your CD set is for an architecture other than i386, that's
(one reason) why - while there is a POV-Ray package in Etch, it is only
built for the i386 architecture and thus missing form all the rest
(even though the -doc, -examples and -includes are in the repository
for all architectures).

No big loss, though, as the binary Debian distributes appears to be 
broken regardless: in the brief tests I did with it on another computer
where I still had the i386 version of the distro, it conjured 
accuracy/coincident surface -type artifacts on well-behaved 
bezier_spline prisms out of thin air while a self-compiled binary 
or the official one from povray.org had no problems.


-- 
Antti Arola
Suosittelen Netpostin boikotointia

Post a reply to this message

"stu" <stu### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>
> S-oooo... what Im wondering really is if any other debian/etch
> povray users may know of an unofficial CD including the non-free
> programs for ETCH, with povray of course ?
>

This is not a link to the ETCH CD's, but a link to live linux CD's, evaluated on
the basis of their containing programs like povray and blender.

shameless plug, of course!

http://pterandon.blogspot.com/2008/06/review-of-blender-containing-live-cds.html

Post a reply to this message

Antti Arola <aea### [at] ioboxfi> wrote:
> when talking about "free" in relation to software, the FOSS crowd 
> typically means "free as in speech" and not "free as in beer".

  I find that allusion completely flawed.

  "Free speech" means that you are not limited to what the *contents*
of your message are. In other words, you can express whatever you want
(for example negative opinions of the government) with impunity.

  "Free speech" does *not* mean "anyone is free to use the text in any
way they like". Publications always fall into copyright, and even if
they contain "free speech", the use of the text may still be limited.
For example it may be illegal to copy the text and publish it in another
publication.

  Obviously this is not what the FOSS means with "free", and thus the
allusion is just wrong.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 24.06. 2008, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Antti Arola <aea### [at] ioboxfi> wrote:
>> when talking about "free" in relation to software, the FOSS crowd 
>> typically means "free as in speech" and not "free as in beer".
>
>   I find that allusion completely flawed.

And rightly so. Apologies for perpetuating that expression, but
I'm afraid seeing it so often has polluted my phrase repository,
and while flawed, it does at least manage to make the distinction
between ideological freedom and lack of cost. :-\

I doubt anyone will ever manage to distill what software freedom
truly and exactly means into a catchy one- or two-liner, for even
FOSS advocates themselves can't seem to be able to agree with
each other on where the lines should be drawn.

-- 
Antti Arola
Suosittelen Netpostin boikotointia

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 08:05:23 -0400, Warp wrote:

>   "Free speech" means that you are not limited to what the *contents*
> of your message are. In other words, you can express whatever you want
> (for example negative opinions of the government) with impunity.
> 
>   "Free speech" does *not* mean "anyone is free to use the text in any
> way they like". Publications always fall into copyright, and even if
> they contain "free speech", the use of the text may still be limited.
> For example it may be illegal to copy the text and publish it in another
> publication.
> 
>   Obviously this is not what the FOSS means with "free", and thus the
> allusion is just wrong.

I dunno, basically what the GPL is saying is you're free to do with the 
code what you want, but if you produce a modified version of the program, 
you have to make the source available as well (ie, you have to use it 
within a set of rules as defined in the GPL, just as you can reuse 
someone's speech as long as you follow copyright law.)

Doesn't seem so different to me.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 08:05:23 -0400, Warp wrote:
> 
>>   "Free speech" means that you are not limited to what the *contents*
>> of your message are. In other words, you can express whatever you want
>> (for example negative opinions of the government) with impunity.
>>
>>   "Free speech" does *not* mean "anyone is free to use the text in any
>> way they like". Publications always fall into copyright, and even if
>> they contain "free speech", the use of the text may still be limited.
>> For example it may be illegal to copy the text and publish it in another
>> publication.
>>
>>   Obviously this is not what the FOSS means with "free", and thus the
>> allusion is just wrong.
> 
> I dunno, basically what the GPL is saying is you're free to do with the 
> code what you want, but if you produce a modified version of the program, 
> you have to make the source available as well (ie, you have to use it 
> within a set of rules as defined in the GPL, just as you can reuse 
> someone's speech as long as you follow copyright law.)
> 
> Doesn't seem so different to me.
> 
	Except that you *cannot* reuse someone else's speech unless they
explicitly authorized it (which most people don't do until you ask
them, if then).

		Jerome
- --
+------------------------- Jerome M. BERGER ---------------------+
|    mailto:jeb### [at] freefr      | ICQ:    238062172            |
|    http://jeberger.free.fr/     | Jabber: jeb### [at] jabberfr   |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------+
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkhhR5EACgkQd0kWM4JG3k8g4gCdGi6ShXUIG6hYvt8NNO6YuOlf
hTIAn2xo8o5+CqcWiRGqG6AlrZD9xca7
=/Bch
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> I dunno, basically what the GPL is saying is you're free to do with the 
> code what you want, but if you produce a modified version of the program, 
> you have to make the source available as well 

No. If you *distribute* a modified version of the binaries, you have to 
make the source available as well. Large difference.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
  Helpful housekeeping hints:
   Check your feather pillows for holes
    before putting them in the washing machine.

Post a reply to this message