Bug 12415 - Missing source code of osso-backup
: Missing source code of osso-backup
Status: NEW
Product: Settings and Maintenance
: unspecified
: N900 Maemo
: Unspecified enhancement with 4 votes (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: unassigned
: backup-restore-bugs
  Show dependency tree
Reported: 2011-09-13 15:43 UTC by Pali Rohár
Modified: 2014-03-08 10:25 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:



You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Description Pali Rohár (reporter) 2011-09-13 15:43:58 UTC
(Settings > General > About product)

(Explain in detail what you do (e.g. tap on OK) and what you see (e.g. message
Connection Failed appears))



(always, less than 1/10, 5/10, 9/10)



Backup application is in armel deb package osso-backup and there is no source
code of this package. In this deb package is copyright file where is written
that license of backup application in GPL. See file:

Copyright (c) 2005 Nokia Corporation.

osso-backup is licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL.

So of osso-backup is under GPL, could Nokia release source code of Backup
Comment 1 Piotr Jawidzyk maemo.org 2012-05-26 19:06:13 UTC
Pali browsed repository.maemo.org and found source code of old version (maemo
maemo 4.0) here:

Still, source code for Maemo 5 version is missing, or we don't know where to
find it. Of course, file stating, that package is GPL'ed was found inside
Maemo's 5 version.

Please note, that it's not request to change license, but bug about missing
source for already GPL'ed thing.
Comment 2 Lucas Maneos 2012-05-26 19:44:47 UTC
*** This bug has been confirmed by popular vote. ***
Comment 3 Lucas Maneos 2012-05-26 19:50:38 UTC
Source code could also serve as documentation to satisfy bug 6250.
Comment 4 Andrew Flegg maemo.org 2012-05-27 12:40:37 UTC
Has anyone tried using the official source code request mechanism, as detailed
in the manual? A bug report may be easier, and it might work, but it's not the
mechanism which is *guaranteed* to.
Comment 5 Piotr Jawidzyk maemo.org 2012-05-27 14:06:54 UTC
N900's manual (english version) clearly states, that main way to obtain source
code is via maemo.org - then, requesting it from Nokia directly is only
alternative step.

So, bug report is 100% approriate here.

Comment 6 Andre Klapper maemo.org 2012-05-27 15:27:02 UTC
Quoting from the N900 manual:

"Open source software notice
This product includes certain free/open source software.
The exact terms of the licenses, disclaimers, acknowledgements and notices are
provided to you in the product. You may obtain the source code of the relevant
free and open source software at http://www.maemo.org/. Alternatively, Nokia
offers to provide such source code to you on a CD-ROM for a charge covering the
cost of performing such distribution, such as the cost of media, shipping and
handling, upon written request to Nokia at:
Maemo Source Code Requests
Nokia Corporation
P.O.Box 407
FI-00045 Nokia Group
This offer is valid for a period of three (3) years from the date of the
distribution of this product by Nokia."

(In reply to comment #5)
> N900's manual (english version) clearly states, that main way to obtain source
> code is via maemo.org
> So, bug report is 100% approriate here.

The manual says www.maemo.org. That this also includes bugs.maemo.org is your
personal interpretation. (Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.)
Comment 7 Piotr Jawidzyk maemo.org 2012-05-27 16:49:27 UTC
I'm not saying, that bugs.maemo.org is place, where code should be available
every day (?!). I'm saying, that source code of this very package isn't
available via maemo.org.

Also, Pali requested source code for all open components, and received them on
DVD's. Still, it was dump of everything that is available via maemo.org - code
for package in question *wasn't* available as well.

Seriously, gentleman's, it's perfect candidate for valid bug report, and I
don't see any reason why you're trying to convince anyone, that bug submitter
haven't tried "proper way". Can we focus on resolving it, instead?

Comment 8 Andre Klapper maemo.org 2012-05-27 17:42:02 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> I'm not saying, that bugs.maemo.org is place

And nobody stated that you said.

> Seriously, gentleman's, it's perfect candidate for valid bug report, 

Sure you can try. However basically nobody takes a look at bugs.maemo.org
anymore nowadays (or better: nearly nobody that you would want to talk to about
this problem), and that's why Andrew mentioned another way that might have more
Comment 9 Andrew Flegg maemo.org 2012-05-27 18:02:16 UTC
Consider my suggestion an *alternative* then, if - for example - the bug report
didn't go anywhere (for whatever reason).

That the DVD didn't include everything is worrying, and I'd write back asking
for specific sources of things which weren't present.
Comment 10 Piotr Jawidzyk maemo.org 2012-05-27 18:13:09 UTC
That's good point, and for sure we'll try this way.

Anyway, it's a pity that "no one is looking at bugs anymore" - it seems like
failing to maintain responsibilities. But of course, i understand, that You're
just stating facts.

As for this particular bug, I've mailed Qgil about it, at the very moment, when
my first comment here was made.

I hope, that Nokia's contact within Maemo Community is also appropriate person
to be bugged about this bug.

Comment 11 Quim Gil nokia 2012-05-27 21:46:03 UTC
Assigning to me. I already forwarded Pali's email to the best contacts inside
Nokia to know what is the situation and what can we do.

Sorry, I was only aware of this bug after Pali's email. Not saying that notices
didn't reach my mailbox before. It's just that... Thank you for your
understanding. I'm hoping to give you an answer soon.
Comment 12 Piotr Jawidzyk maemo.org 2012-05-27 23:08:13 UTC
No problem Quim, and I'm sure everything will went back into correct track now
Comment 13 David Gumberg 2013-10-16 15:42:17 UTC
Has there been any progress on this? Over a year has passed and there hasn't
been any talk on this bug report? Do you know what the status is Quim?