Saturday, December 20, 2008

new releases.

3 more Cool SL Viewer releases available, improved RevertUIchanges patch, with a nicer friends list and properly working tooltips for the packets loss and bandwidth indicators (which stopped showing their tooltips in v1.20 and later viewers).

Cool SL Viewer v1.19.0.5 release 42
Cool SL Viewer v1.21.1.6 release 10
Cool SL Viewer v1.22.4.0 release 1


Ben Hoark said...

The links appear to be broken:

"Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at"

I get a similar response from Safari.


Hyang Zhao said...

Ben, seems it was hosting outage, working now.

confused.brit said...

Hey, is there a version of this for linux, or is it all windows?

I'm looking for a lighter, more stable SL client since the official Linux client will not run on a machine which would run the windows version just fine....

Hyang Zhao said...

Its all for Mac here :)
For linux see

Yohane Rockett said...

TY for the viewer =^.^=

Hyang Zhao said...


9C Magic said...

How do you get the RLV functions to turn on? I downloaded it, but RLV doesn't seem to work.

9C Magic said...

Sorry! Just figured it out. I had a blonde moment... and my hairpiece isn't even blonde. Its blue!

Suzanna Vella said...

Hello Hyang,

As the original viewer is open source, I wonder where I can download the source code of CoolSL. Can you publish a link to it? Does not need to be the most recent version. I just want to have a look into it in order to understand how some things work. This is important for me as I am developing a bot and need more examples than the libopenmv/libsecondlife package provides. Thank you!

Oh by the way: Keep up the great work with CoolSL for Mac! I love it! :-)

Hyang Zhao said...

Suzanna, all patches from here:

Hyang Zhao said...

main CV site in my links, actually.

Suzanna Vella said...

Ah ok, sorry. :-)
Are there no Mac-specific modifications? The bot (very special thingy) shall run on an Apple Xserve, and I just want to make sure that I have all details researched well, before I kick off with the development.

Thank you again. Will stop nagging :-)

Hyang Zhao said...

no, it pretty much cross platform code, so special mods not needed for building viewer.

Suzanna Vella said...

Ok, just to make sure: You are aware that the SecondLife Viewer Source is licensed under GPL v2 (with FLOSS exception for linking against proprietary libraries -- the licenses can be found in the original source's doc folder), which automatically requires you to publish exactly the source code you used for your binary public releases as well? And you have to provide it "from the same place".

Read in particular the second paragraph of this GPL FAQ article (and probably many of the other articles as well), please.

I understand that you'd like to gain credit for your work. Also I do appreciate the effort you make, really! And the Cool Viewer is a very nice piece of software.
However, publishing the source code is not optional as the copyright holder (Linden Lab) decided to publish the original under the GPL.
So could you please provide links to the source code together with the binary releases? Thank you.

Hyang Zhao said...

Suzanna, here links for you:

Boy Lane said...


"at the same place" means at the same medium. That medium is the internet and you can even access it at the same place, your computer :).

Hyang arranged for you to find the patches on Henri's site or the full source tree on my blog :). We also arranged to link back to this blog here. So there is no issue with the GPL.

"However, if you make arrangements with another site to keep the necessary source code available, and put a link or cross-reference to the source code next to the binaries, we think that qualifies as “from the same place”."

Suzanna said...

Thanks, but why is it such a big deal to just put the complete source code rather than the various pieces you assembled it from into an archive file and make it available publicly? This (and the following) GPL FAQ article cannot really be mistaken.
@Boy: the same place is also described in the GPL FAQ. The internet as a whole isnot the same place.

Anyway. The reason why I am that picky is that I like the idea behind the GPL. However, it does not work if some people decide to bend the rules or silently ignore some terms. If you publish binaries which source has originally been released under the terms of the GPL, you don't have a choice. You cannot opt-out. The GPL is binding for all derived works, which are published. If you are not happy with that, you must not use the code and release compiled binaries.

If you want to comply with the GPL, you have to put a link to the source you compiled the binary from (your whole working copy with applied patches, not just the original plus some patches elsewhere) next to the links to the binaries. If the links lead to an external site, you still have to ensure that the linked source code matches exactly your binary distribution.

Hyang Zhao said...

Suzanna, sure i can publish latest patched source, but it makes no sense for me, you can get absolutely same after running "patch -p1" on released LL source tree.

Suzanna said...

Oh it makes perfectly sense, because people (including myself and a friend of mine) want to see the code as is, and we cannot be bothered downloading all the bits and pieces from various locations, figuring out which versions are needed exactly, and applying a bunch of patches in any particular order. People may want exactly the code which you compiled to create your binaries. And the GPL clearly supports that: "So you need to provide complete sources, not just diffs, with the binaries."
What's the big deal to run a tar/zip whatever against your source directory and upload it together with the binary and be 100% GPL compliant then?

Chalice Yao said...

As a matter of fact, no.
Hyang does not need to link to the source on any kind of website. What she -does- need to do is do in that case tho, is include a written offer to deliver the source code on request to those who have aquired the binary. This is section 3(b) in the GPL, and also gets covered in the FAQ for exactly that situation. The delivery of the source code does not need to be via the internet. She can charge for the shipping of any media the source code is on. Given that it is a public release, anybody using it can request the source.

GPL aside, requesting the source in this case instead of just following the instructions on Henri's main Cool Viewer website (it has an autopatcher and everything), is really nitpicking and, while true to the GPL, putting a strain on somebody who is just doing this for fun and sharing.

Suzanna said...

Chalice, I think you are not quite right there. If she offers binaries for download (and does not distribute them on other media exclusively), she has to provide the source in a similar way... A bit further down your quoted paragraph (end of 3), it says: "If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code"
The 3-year offering of providing source on offline media is meant for people who cannot download it for some reason, and for people who insist on receiving it on non-online media.

Anyway, I am not nitpicking. And as I said, I do appreciate Hyang's work (I am using the CoolViewer myself). As someone who has contributed to different GPL'ed projects every now and then over the last 15 years (yes, for fun also), I am quite sensible when some people don't care about the license. The question why Hyang publishes binary releases, but so far refuses to publish the corresponding source, although it's not a big deal to upload the source, must be allowed.

For me, the patching stuff would do it (although that's far from ideal), but that's nowhere near sufficient in terms of the GPL.

It's not my fault that Linden Lab decided to go for the GPL, and it's also not my fault that the GPL is rather strict. But without the GPL as an actual fact we all would see much less proper open source software out there than we actually do. So if we take the benefit of getting access to that code and being able to modify it, we should also do our best to comply with the GPL when re-bundling or re-publishing any software derived from the GPL'ed original.

I know that nobody appreciates when people speak up on behalf of copyright owners and put their finger on obvious licensing conflicts. Apparently people feel rather offended than thinking for 2-3 minutes and giving 5 minutes of extra effort to comply with the rules.
I can live with it, as I am not the copyright owner here.

I may be the first one who asked for the full source code here. But depending on the life-time of your viewer (hopefully quite a long time) and the number of residents who use it, I will certainly not be the last. And while I have only justified why I am asking for the code, others may go a step further...

Anyway, it's your business. I am out of this discussion now.

Balp said...

The full source is out there. Given that Hyang and Henri in this viewer are a team there two pages cant in no way not count as the same "media". As stated in the GPL Faq is possibly to have sources posted on a other site even if you link to it. There IS NO what so ever line that you can't provide code in different files. With instructions how to build. Henri's instructions how to build the viewer are MUCH better that the original once at

The day LL takes down the old source, I'm sure Henri have a plan how to provide a down load link of his own. Now please thanks Hyang for her time, hive her a hug she need it. You need someone to fight over this distribution method i suggest take a look at Ubuntu, OpenBSD or a little bigger project that have some funding and maybe time to take that up. In Ubuntu you have source tar balls and patches, In OpenBSD there posts system, that inspired gentoo, have makefiles and downloads source packages form the original site. Of cource there are available as precompiled packages as well.

Now please contribute to the code make something good don't attack the good guys, go for the bad once. And they are out there, but remember a nice polite question. Will give you a better response, yaah, btw, Mine and Nicholaz have the same way of distribution. Except we have even less good instructions.

Disclaimer about all viewer builds