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 >> license. >> > > 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? thanks, greg k-h
