[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080608081329.36dce5e1@gaivota>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 08:13:29 -0300
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
ksummit-2008-discuss@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] RFC: Moving firmware blobs out of the
kernel.
On Fri, 30 May 2008 02:04:18 +0300
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> wrote:
> The firmware is an independent and separate work in itself. Section 2 of
> the GPL talks about such sections of the work, explicitly.
For me, both inside kernel or on a separate tree would produce similar results.
Yet, a separate tree will be a little more painful.
One alternative to keep this at kernel -git tree would be to write a COPYING or
LICENSE file at firmware dir, explicitly stating that most of those firmwares
have proprietary licenses and are there just to make easier for kernel develoment.
Being in-tree or out kernel tree, we should explicitly state what license each
firmware uses, and having the license terms of proprietary firmwares there.
I would add a metatag at the .ihex file to reference to what license applies to
each firmware. Something like FIRMWARE_LICENSE("some vendor license #1"). For
those legacy firmwares where we don't know, we may simply add "unknown".
Cheers,
Mauro
--
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