[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 02:12:55 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, greg@...ah.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, Jack Lo <jlo@...are.com>
Subject: Re: A proposal - binary
On Sun 2006-08-06 15:45:29, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> Pavel Machek wrote:
> >...it should be very easy to opensource simple 'something' layer. If
> >it is so complex it is 'hard' to opensource, it is missdesigned,
> >anyway... so fix the design.
> >
>
> It's not a design issue - it's a legal issue at this point, and one that
> I'm not qualified to come up with a good answer for. The biggest
> technical issue I think for open sourcing the VMI, is that it is not
> part of the kernel, but stand alone firmware with a rather bizarre build
> environment, so the code alone is not sufficient to allow it to be open
> sourced, but this is not a hard problem to solve.
Well, I guess we'd like VMI to be buildable in normal kernel build
tools ... and at that point, open sourcing it should be _really_ easy.
And we'd prefer legal decisions not to influence technical ones. Maybe
we will decide to use binary interface after all, but seeing GPLed,
easily-buildable interface, first, means we can look at both solutions
and decide which one is better.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists