Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 30 Mar 2004 13:39:15 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Binary-only firmware covered by the GPL? |
| |
Hi!
> >#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.
If my code contains picture of human, do I have to provide his DNA, too? Pavel
(runs away) -- 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms
- 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/
| |