Nice to see this float around.  This technology is actually being developed
in the valley, a friend of mine works on these devices for a company
contracted 5 years ago to start dev on it.  They use a form of embedded
linux on arm devices, afaik.  Cool tech if you ask me.

On 5/29/07, Tuna <tuna@supertunaman.com> wrote:
>
> Yeah. Sort of a disappointment, really. A homebrew LandWarrior would be
> ferkin' awesome!
>
> > Never mind, I did not see the rest of the thread.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: plug-discuss-bounces@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> > [mailto:plug-discuss-bounces@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of
> > der.hans
> > Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 12:41 PM
> > To: Main PLUG discussion list
> > Subject: Re: Land Warrior
> >
> > Am 26. May, 2007 schwätzte Tuna so:
> >
> >> Apparently the Army's Land Warrior system runs Linux.
> >>
> >> http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4215725.html
> >
> > Interesting. Where can we buy those displays?
> >
> >> But here's my question: Where's the code? Don't they have to release
> >> the source code if it's open source?
> >
> > If it's your code under the GPL and you don't release the binary to
> anyone
> > you don't have to provide the source.
> >
> > The government isn't allowed to own copyright, so most likely the
> software
> > is provided by companies. If they're providing it under the GPL they
> only
> > need to offer to provide the source code to those who've gotten the
> binary
> > products. In other words, they can offer the source code to the
> > government, but don't have to offer it to anyone who isn't buying these
> > units.
> >
> > The government isn't under obligation to release the source code. If you
> > thought for more than 2 seconds about the possibility of this government
> > releasing military info it doesn't need to release you wasted your time.
> >
> > The source code doesn't necessarily have to be GPL (I didn't read the
> > whole article, so maybe I missed something saying the application code
> is
> > GPL), so it might be proprietary.
> >
> > The GPL only affects modifications to GPL code bases or code that
> depends
> > on GPL code. Generally, if you interface with the GPL code via and API
> > you're not subject to the GPL. The Affero modification to the GPL covers
> > this case, but the GNU GPL does not.
> >
> > If you're including a library that's under the GPL you'd be subject to
> the
> > GPL. The easy way to avoid that is to write your own library and not use
> > one that's been GPLd.
> >
> > ciao,
> >
> > der.hans
> > --
> > #  https://www.LuftHans.com/        http://www.CiscoLearning.org/
> > #  "Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by
> > understanding."
> > #    -- Albert Einstein
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>



-- 

-------------------
Regards,
Adam Ballai
Plutonic Networks
http://www.dotgnu.org