ping.
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 2:11 PM Niteesh G. S. <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 1:37 AM Joel Sherrill <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 2:16 PM Niteesh G. S. <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> In a recent review of these patches >>> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-July/060653.html >>> Gedare mentioned that we cannot use these patches with the >>> current license. More details regarding the conversation can be >>> found in the following archive. >>> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-July/061000.html >>> >>> The following files have been ported to RTEMS to implement >>> the OFW API. >>> 1) openfirm.h -- BSD-4 License >>> 2) openfirm.c -- BSD-4 License >>> 3) ofw_fdt.c -- BSD-2 License >>> >>> The files with BSD4 cannot be used and Gedare suggested to >>> check if we can remove the entire 4-clause cluster or remove >>> clauses #3 and #4. I checked this along with the help of Christian >>> and it seems that we can't remove those. Christian suggested >>> that we can use the header file with the BSD-4 license to some >>> extent but the source files to pose a problem. We also checked >>> OpenBSD it has the same licensing. >>> >> >> NetBSD appears to be the origin of the code and although I believe >> they did a largely blanket change from BSD-4, this code is old and >> normally, I would doubt they found the original submitter. Which >> would be odd in this case because this is his website with email: >> >> https://solfrank.net/Wolfgang/ >> >> I have privately emailed to politely ask him to relicense it to BSD-2 >> for use in RTEMS. And try to do that in a way that gets it on a path >> to get changed upstream. >> >> Hopefully this will solve it. >> > > Thanks for doing this Joel :). > >> >> >>> So we have come up with the following suggestions >>> 1) Use the header files as it is. >>> >> >> How close are you to being able to merge? Do we have time to let >> him answer? >> > > Yes, we do have a lot of time. All of my patches are based on the new build > system so we won't be able to merge until the build system is merged. And > also there are other things that have to be discussed regarding the patch. > >> >> >>> 2) Most OF_* functions defined in openfirm.c have 1:1 mapping >>> with the FDT implementation in ofw_fdt.c so there is a possibility >>> to remove openfirm.c and only use openfirm.h and ofw_fdt.c. >>> For those functions which don't have a 1:1 mapping, we can add >>> an implementation in ofw_fdt.c. And remove the functions which >>> don't have an FDT based implementation eg. OF_write, OF_open etc. >>> >>> Also please remember that these patches were created with a goal >>> to import the OFW into RTEMS and remove them from libBSD so >>> will using the above approach has a chance of breaking libBSD >>> compatibility in the future? >>> >> >> Yikes. That would mean having to create our own files that are >> compatible but don't have the license issue. >> >> And that our implementation is in a source transparent form that >> allows updates easily from the upstream source. >> >> If we can't get relicense permission, I think we have to rewrite the >> BSD-4 code and provide compatible versions. :( >> > > As of now, this seems to be the only option but let's hope for someone > to come up with a better approach or get the license relaxed. > > Thanks, > Niteesh > > >> >>> Thanks, >>> Niteesh. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> devel mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >> >>
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
