[Kernel] Ziggy471 MECHA BETA Kernel UPDATED 3 May 11

[Adrynalyne]

Really, where is the URL?

As for starting a riot, I did no such thing. I even requested the source, both here, and on XDA, and received no response.

[Mr. X]

Ive edited Ziggy's home url to make it easier to find the source go take a look. And removed the links to older tar balls from my site.

[jcase]

EDIT Mr X (mod here and apparently Ziggy's webadmin) added the source link publicly now, but it was not publicly available before, and Ziggy admitted this himself. http://i.imgur.com/FFXl0.png This should now settle the issue for everyone I hope.

<old post starts here>

You sir are wrong, there is not matching source (at the time of these postings) to his kernel that is publicly available. There is no source on his site, that matches the kernels he has posted. Similar source, original source, source from another kernel does not constitute compliance.

He heve admits this himself.

Originally Posted by Mr. X

Guys, the source is publicly up. In fact, I'm cloning the mecha source right now.

PPCGeeks does not require him to post a link to it just prove to us that it is publicly available.

Maybe if you spend less time riding his ass and just shot him a PM he may even do the leg work and just link you rather than expecting you guys to use some common sense and find it on his web page, lol.

He has been working on setting up his own git server for some time. He used to host his tar balls on my site. The source has always been there. Just not on a silver platter with some one spooning it to you.

You want the source, send him a PM don't post your email publicly. Try just talking to him rather than starting a riot, and reporting PPCGeeks for GPL violations when we're clearly not. We're not even hosting said binaries. And we've already asked him for source and he produced.

You guys need to get some facts straight before you start a lynch mob and drag everyone through mud for nothing.

He is in compliance with the GPL, It's currently uploaded and available to the public if they looked.

Don't bother reporting this thread it will be ignored.

[Mr. X]

Originally Posted by jcase

EDIT Mr X (mod here and apparently Ziggy's webadmin) added the source link publicly now, but it was not publicly available before, and Ziggy admitted this himself. http://i.imgur.com/FFXl0.png


You sir are wrong, there is not matching source (at the time of these postings) to his kernel that is publicly available. There is no source on his site, that matches the kernels he has posted. Similar source, original source, source from another kernel does not constitute compliance.

He heve admits this himself.

Why are you posting an image to his site before I put in the Git tab. I stated that i just added that.

The source was up on a publicly accessible url. The fact that it wasn't linked in the top bar until I decided to make it easier to find does not negate the fact it was publicly up.

Why are you linking to a previous post that was also taken down since he got the git server working and moved away from randomly updated tarballs.

And by the way that source is newer than the publicly compiled binaries. And its the exact source that was used for all the kernels in the first post. It's just been further patched and updated.




Just sayin'

[Adrynalyne]

jcase is making a point that the source does not match the kernels posted.

At any rate, thank you for this, but remember, publishing source does not mean putting it on a publicly accessible website, with no link, and no replies to requests for it.

If you don't publish the link, whether accessible or not, its private.

[jcase]

Originally Posted by Mr. X

Why are you posting an image to his site before I put in the Git tab. I stated that i just added that.

The source was up on a publicly accessible url. The fact that it wasn't linked in the top bar until I decided to make it easier to find does not negate the fact it was publicly up.

Why are you linking to a previous post that was also taken down since he got the git server working and moved away from randomly updated tarballs.

And by the way that source is newer then the publicly compiled binaries. And its the exact source that was used for all the kernels in the first post. It's just been further patched and updated.

Just sayin'

At the time of writing it (which should of been obvious from my edits) you had not replied saying you had added the GIT link.

Putting the source on a publicly facing server, then NOT telling people where it is, AND telling them it is NOT available (please see http://i.imgur.com/2IsxO.png) does not meet the requirements of the GPL, and does not constitute publicly available source.

Just sayin' you were mistaken in your post. I understand the need to defend friends, and I respect that. However that does not change the facts.

The whole issue was not that it is available now, but previously (you know when the issue was raised).

Further more, I have been unable to get the source to build as is, with the standard toolchain and an environment that builds stock source fine. With tweaking it might build, but right now I just don't have time. (I am not the only one that is experiencing this).

[Mr. X]

Originally Posted by Adrynalyne

jcase is making a point that the source does not match the kernels posted.

At any rate, thank you for this, but remember, publishing source does not mean putting it on a publicly accessible website, with no link, and no replies to requests for it.

If you don't publish the link, whether accessible or not, its private.

Sending him a pm would have been much more efficient then asking in the thread and getting angry if it gets over looked or ignored for what ever reason.

So now your complaining that he hasn't posted source separately for every single change in kernel revision. so the recent source that all those kernels derived from is not good enough eh?

If this isn't something personal then you got some work lined up for yah. I can find dozens of threads on XDA that have archived kernel and Roms with said kernels that the source has been updated for and no longer "current for the posted source"

Shall we launch a full blown movement in general. Or are we just after Ziggy right now.

Hell the CM rom i'm running has a kernel that the publicly posted source is no longer available for. it doesn't exists it has been assimilated by the currently up to date source.

So are we good here now? Because i'd like to clean up this thread and get it back on topic.


The source is now up. Any further discussion is to be done in PM to Ziggy or who ever else you wish to contact about this.

Edit: I just called Ziggy as well to let him know i made the changes to his url, and he said to tell you it wasn't ignored. He has been pulling 12h days at work and you were on the list to get back to.

[jcase]

Originally Posted by Mr. X

Sending him a pm would have been much more efficient then asking in the thread and getting angry if it gets over looked or ignored for what ever reason.

So now your complaining that he hasn't posted source separately for every single change in kernel revision. so the recent source that all those kernels derived from is not good enough eh?

If this isn't something personal then you got some work lined up for yah. I can find dozens of threads on XDA that have archived kernel and Roms with said kernels that the source has been updated for and no longer "current for the posted source"

Shall we launch a full blown movement in general. Or are we just after Ziggy right now.

Hell the CM rom i'm running has a kernel that the publicly posted source is no longer available for. it doesn't exists it has been assimilated by the currently up to date source.

So are we good here now? Because i'd like to clean up this thread and get it back on topic.

The source is now up. Any further discussion is to be done in PM to Ziggy or who ever else you wish to contact about this.

Why would someone PM Ziggy asking, after he already told us publicly that it was not available? How does that make sense at all? The source posted does not seem to match ANY kernel he posted, and does not properly build as-is.

Where did anyone complain about needing source to all of them? (I may have missed this)

No one ever targeted Ziggy specifically, we pipe'd up on a point, that many of us do when we see this happening. Refusal to comply is different than not having source available publicly. He did both.

Your points are invalid. Cleaning up this thread would serve no purpose other than to hide a chain of events. It should be preserved for public record.

[Mr. X]

Originally Posted by jcase

At the time of writing it (which should of been obvious from my edits) you had not replied saying you had added the GIT link.

Putting the source on a publicly facing server, then NOT telling people where it is, AND telling them it is NOT available (please see http://i.imgur.com/2IsxO.png) does not meet the requirements of the GPL, and does not constitute publicly available source.

Just sayin' you were mistaken in your post. I understand the need to defend friends, and I respect that. However that does not change the facts.

The whole issue was not that it is available now, but previously (you know when the issue was raised).

Further more, I have been unable to get the source to build as is, with the standard toolchain and an environment that builds stock source fine. With tweaking it might build, but right now I just don't have time. (I am not the only one that is experiencing this).

You will have to use arm-linux-gnueabi gcc 4.5

[jcase]

Originally Posted by Mr. X

You will have to use arm-linux-gnueabi gcc 4.5

Will give it a go after the Google I/O is over for the day.