On 06/08/18 15:26, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> On 06/08/18 13:48, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >>> Frank Cox wrote: >>>>>> so if it would work, replace shortname with short and short1? >>>> >>>> With all of this hokey-pokey surrounding licensing and mac addresses, I >>>> wonder if this outfit is actually still in compliance with the terms of >>>> their license for this software, whatever it may be? >>>> >>>> If the software licensed to run only on Machine X and Machine X has now >>>> been junked and replace by Machine Y, then isn't the solution to >>>> obtain a license for the software for Machine Y or be out-of compliance >>>> regardless of the technical ability to spoof whatever it's looking for? >> >> Frank, I 100% agree with you. The only case with spoofed MAC address and >> license that may have chance to stand in court will be if all below are >> true: >> >> 1. the company issued perpetual license. >> 2. the company does not exist >> 3. the original hardware died (be it motherboard whose embedded NIC >> license was locked to or network card) >> 4. single replacement machine (meeting requirements of license; >> sometimes it is number of CPUs/cores, memory, etc) is used to replace it >> [imminently needing to spoof MAC address] >> 5. fair effort was made to find and notify about the above whoever >> inherited rights of dissolved company >> >> But I bet the lawyer can find flaws in what I tried to say. > > Both users' old workstations were at least 6 years old, maybe more. They > got surplused (I'm the one who did that). So it's only on the two machines > that the licenses were for. But.... I assume it was very expensive when > they bought it. >> >> On a similar note: one of the companies whose software scientists here >> were using a lot (IDL is a product) changed hand several times, and last >> owner changed licensing terms and stopped signing perpetual licenses. >> With perpetual license you were able to keep upgrading software during >> support period, usually 1 year, and keep using last version later >> forever only you are locked to that older version. They stopped signing >> perpetual licenses, and made it "software for rent" with 1 year rent >> term. When that happened I recommended all our people to avoid using IDL >> in new projects (python was my recommendation as fair replacement - just >> what I know, not that I consider it better than other alternatives). As >> a programmer (former I should say, as I don't put my dirty hands into >> code lately, almost not) I wouldn't invest my time into mastering >> something that I not necessarily will have access to at some point in a >> future... > > Yeah. We have a number of folks here using R, and fewer still using Matlab. Sounds like your former matlab users are happy with R (bad name, BTW, try to search...). Thanks, I will know now what to mention as alternative if it will be about matlab! Valeri > > mark > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++