¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

  1. RaspberryPi-4-HamRadio
  2. Messages
Single Messages Topics Expanded Polls

Locked Re: Disabling Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC)

 

I wasn't at issue w/ the "home made" QSLWARE NOTICE --- I congratulate?you for creating?this "distro" -- I know I was doing linux distros back in '95.? Not easy.? Plus the plethora of playbooks is to be commended.

What was a bit strong?armed was the inability to disable BOINC -- sure a great app for doing computes on empty clock cycles - don't get me wrong, again - but as I came to know with this software or anything that run in background stealing cycles -- it can drain other thing you may, from one's own perspective not really want happening?especially on these small Broadcom-based boards that typically don't have a lot of thermal?management.? I run a hotspot on a Pi0 w/ a MMDVM hat -- and even at idle it runs 127-129F degrees in my house which is typically 78-80 degrees.? So, BOINC if one analyzes it, will run all the cores at full duty cycle doing computes, and these little Broadcoms are taxed,?to say the least (and sure these pi-board may/may not have been created with the traditional compute demands, so one may expect their?livelihood is limited).? One has to put into perspective that BOINC was a target of Intel & Sparc based systems -- can't say today since it's been awhile since I dove into source.

Also you're routing all these distros into a couple of BOINC accounts -- `boinccmd --acct_mgr attach "169373....`. so if one had their own account --
the "discoveries" are not attributed to the individual compute efforts. (Sure "no reward for running'' - but could be a pride
thing for some folks) - I'm just saying.

Again - I applaud your effort. It was in and of itself herculean and many kudos to you. Just inventing a ELU -- ehh
little uncool for something that's bundling in a plethora of GPL/MIT'd software. But hey RHEL's been getting
away with it -- but they don't enforce a ELU on the s/w just the support and distribution?of their IP'd code.
A bit of a different story.

If it was represented as a "distribution" -- then sure no issue with you personalizing it and creating a ELU - but this has always been a grey area in tech, heck it's a permutation of the old "mix tapes" -- who and what rights are passed along.? I'm not armchair?lawyering any of the efforts put forth - but call it as it is --- you are limiting the capabilities one has to prescribe unto if and when you want to use the product youi produced.? I guess that's the perspective I'm coming at this from.? Seems you are involved in commercial software, but this is a whole different beast and if commercialization is the ultimate?goal - i can accept that and cobble together the pieces myself. But I believe and as you mentioned in videos - you just want to make this easier for other hams - cool.? Especially since Pi is linux based and from what I've seen a large majority of hams have a hard time with windows let alone Linux. LOL.

l8tr


On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 12:13 PM Dave Slotter, W3DJS <slotter@...> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 02:57 PM, thegadget techie wrote:
some implied remuneration?herein
I charge no money, nothing, nada, zilch.

I don't think asking for a postcard to remove a nag dialog is out of the question. What I wonder about is how petty a person can get that would complain about such a small thing? And if they choose not to send the postcard? Well, the nag dialog isn't going to prevent them from using the image.

If people have issues running BOINC, I'm not such an unreasonable person that if they approached me directly that i wouldn't force them to run it. Not everyone has a fan on their setup. I get it. So if they approached me with a good reason to disable it, I would grant that request. But to take the choice away from me as the author of the creation is to strip away my rights that I worked hard for. It negates the six months of time I took to build the image and discourages me from sharing in the future.

And my source code is open for inspection. Just because I have a custom license and not a boilerplate GPL or MIT license keeps it from being open source. Nothing in my license takes away existing GPL licenses. People are free to modify their GPL software. I think there's a lot of headache due to "armchair lawyers" not understanding the nuances of the law or the LICENSE as it pertains to the software image and misapplying their incorrect assumptions.
?
--
- Dave
??

Join [email protected] to automatically receive all group messages.