Any java lib. to parse .cab file?

[Lew]

I agree that the GPL is based on the proposition you've stated, but it
reflects a feelings that selling software is itself immoral,

As others have already amply demonstrated, that is strictly your own personal
interpretation and not the actual intention or result of the GPL.

and that's crap.

Straw-man argument. You have successfully argued against a position that the
proponents of the GPL do not hold.

 

[Lew]

Red Hat mainly sells support services, but they do make some money
selling actual plastic disks with Linux on them. According to your

IBM makes a fair bit of change by selling mainframes that run Linux.

 

[Mike Schilling]

Your two posts above seem to contradict each other. First you
complain that you cannot redistribute GPLed software for money, then
you claim you aren't in that business.

I'm not in the business of redistributing other people's software;
never have been, and don't expect to be in the future. Red Hat isn't
selling the software per se (since that can be gotten for free),
they're selling packaging and support.

 

[Mike Schilling]

IBM makes a fair bit of change by selling mainframes that run Linux.

Giving the OS away with the hardware is a very old model; most
hardware manufacturers that write their own OS's do it as well.

 

[Andreas Leitgeb]

A completely unnecessary and paradoxical disclaimer, ...

Point taken. Information *optionally* given, anyway.

 

[Lew]

Nah, it's important, when in some countries it's not allowed to give
legal advice *unless* you're a licensed professional of the law. Germany
is one of them, IIRC (or they changed it). Slippery ground

Then one is violating that law regardless of the disclaimer, assuming
one can construe the remarks that follow as giving legal advice. Do
those countries excuse the perpetrator if they say they're not a
lawyer? Doesn't that amount to proclaiming that you are breaking the
law? Isn't the disclaimer just as foolish and unnecessary in Germany
as anywhere else?

When a person expresses an opinion about the meaning of a law, is that
the same as giving legal advice? I have not seen anyone here on
Usenet give legal advice, but I have seen a number of people express
their opinions about the interpretation of certain laws.

My legal advice to anyone living in such a country is not to break the
law.

My advice to the governments of all countries is to guarantee freedom
of speech.

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

If I read a journal article describing an algorithm, it's perfectly
moral for me to implement that algorithm and sell the result. It's
also perfectly moral for me to sell a Java program, which is useless
without the JVM and rt.jar that Sun puts time and effort into creating
and then gives away for free. It's also perfectly moral for me to
repackage and modify Xerces and Xalan, and sell a product that
includes the modified versions of those. I've done all of those
things, and don't feel at all dirty.

I agree that the GPL is based on the proposition you've stated, but it
reflects a feelings that selling software is itself immoral, and
that's crap.

That is not how FSF and RMS sees it.

Maybe some GPL users sees it that way.

But you should not blamd FSF and RMS for other peoples
misunderstandings of what open source and GPL means.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

That is, by packaging and supporting software written by others.
That's a fine business and I wish them well, but it's not the business
I'm in.

Then don't use GPL for your software.

But don't claim that in general it is not possible to make
money on GPL software just because GPL does not fit with
your particular business model.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

I'm not in the business of redistributing other people's software;
never have been, and don't expect to be in the future. Red Hat isn't
selling the software per se (since that can be gotten for free),
they're selling packaging and support.

Redhat is a pretty big contributor to some of the stuff they
distribute, but obviously they have not written all of it or even
the majority of it.

But they are able to make money providing something of
value to their customers.

And in a competitive market, where anyone can compete with them.

Arne

 

[mail_pushkarajthorat_at_gmail]

explicitely install it). To unifiy the approach I feel to use some

I still don't see the point in extracting windows specific
files on *nix.

Arne

Our product works on unix and windows platform, so, to carryout
execution we were using cabextract on unix, and we are now "removing
the dependency from cabextract utility" so we were searching some java
lib. to extract it As we expect same code should be used on windows
and unix..

 

[Andrew Thompson]

...we expect same code should be used on windows
and unix..

*Native code?* I don't think so!

Note that if this app. has a GUI, one way to deploy it
(and the correct natives for each OS) is to use webstart.
The platform specific natives can be included in a
resources element targeted to the platform.

 

[Lew]

Our product works on unix and windows platform, so, to carryout
execution we were using cabextract on unix, and we are now "removing
the dependency from cabextract utility" so we were searching some java
lib. to extract it As we expect same code should be used on windows
and unix..

Windows has cabextract via cygwin, IIRC.

 

[Seamus MacRae]

*Native code?* I don't think so!

C source code, presumably, not binaries. If it's portable ANSI C and
doesn't make OS-dependent assumptions about the filesystem, say by
getting the path to the .cab file passed to it as a parameter and not
concerning itself with the file's attributes, only its content, then it
is not implausible.

 

[mail_pushkarajthorat_at_gmail]

*Native code?*  I don't think so!

Note that if this app. has a GUI, one way to deploy it
(and the correct natives for each OS) is to use webstart.
The platform specific natives can be included in a
resources element targeted to the platform.

no native code - java code.

 

[Andreas Leitgeb]

no native code - java code.

I think, it's already well understood, that you're trying to find
java code, that would extract cab-files. (unfortunately, no one
here seems to know one)

What some seem to find puzzling is: of what use it is to unpack a
cab-file (which generally contains mainly windows executables) on
a unix system?

I could think of these reasons:
1) your java-application works on a server and unpacks them
on shared drives which are then mounted to windows-PCs.
2) your java-application does some other sort of analysis on
the windows executables (e.g. it is a virus-scanner, or
a disassembler, or an icon-extractor, ...)
3) the cab-files are your own (containing non-windows-specific
stuff, and you just cannot switch to e.g. .zip for some
reason.)

Perhaps you could select one, or describe your situation (if it's
something else) - just for our curiosity's sake ;-)

 

[Andrew Thompson]

....
Perhaps you could select one, or describe your situation (if it's
something else) - just for our curiosity's sake ;-)

No, if only speaking for myself. Knowing the 'program
feature' (some of which were well expressed in the trimmed
part of your post) that the developer is attempting to
achieve - might lead to completely different strategies
to pursue.

I feel it is often of value to the person asking the
question, to describe the program feature they want to
add to an application.

Too many people are focused on using the hammer they
know, to insert that screw into place (or vice-versa
screwdriver/nail).