On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 06:43:47AM -0500, Richard Freeman wrote:
> On 12/29/2009 07:52 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>> No, the readme/copying is correct, it covers all of the code that runs
>> on the processor as one body of work. Firmware blobs are different in
>> that they do not run in the same processor, and can be of a different
> Yes, but they don't cover everything in the tarball. If I want to copy the
> tarball, then I need to comply with the distribution license of the
> tarball. That license isn't clearly advertised. It is a mix of a number
> of licenses from GPL v2 to allowed-to-copy-without-modifications.
No, you can copy that tarball just fine, and when you _distribute_ it,
the GPLv2 applies to it.
> The processor that the software runs on is fairly irrelevant.
Not true at all, why would you think that? Since when does a license
cross a processor boundry?
> In any case, I'm sure the kernel team will update the ebuild license string
> appropriately - this is more of a debate for the LKML. I just don't think
> that they've done a good job with it. Others are welcome to hold differing
> opinions. :)
You don't think the gentoo kernel team (of which I think I'm the
longest-term member), or the Linux kernel developers (of which I am the
actual person who put those images in the kernel back in the late
1990's after consulting many lawers, and Linus, on the issue) are doing
a good job with this?