Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 Mar 2004 15:19:38 +0100 | From | Stefan Smietanowski <> | Subject | Re: Binary-only firmware covered by the GPL? |
| |
Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include <hallo.h> > * David Schwartz [Thu, Mar 25 2004, 04:41:23PM]: > > >>>IMHO code that can be compiled would probably be the preferred form >>>of the work. >> >> You are seriously arguing that the obfuscated binary of the firmware is the >>preferred form of the firmware for the purpose of making modifications to >>it?! > > > Yes, the driver authors PREFERS to make the changes on the C source > code, he never has to modify the firmware. Exactly what the GPL > requests, where is your problem?
But the firmware didn't appear out of thin air - someone wrote it somehow. If that's using a hex editor or inside the C code doesn't matter, but most likely they used some other language like either C or assembly (no, not all firmware is written using assembly), and there are cases where some are in fact written using a hex editor but I can't remember any that has been for the last 30 or so years but I'm sure there has been cases where there hasn't been a working assembler.
// Stefan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |