From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timur Tabi Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 16:04:48 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] Proposal for a make option to include an additional stand alone program directory In-Reply-To: <00ed01c78845$19bbd690$01c4af0a@Glamdring> References: <20070426200559.1E528353414@atlas.denx.de> <463106E6.20203@freescale.com> <00ed01c78845$19bbd690$01c4af0a@Glamdring> Message-ID: <463113F0.4010804@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Ulf Samuelsson wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timur Tabi" > To: "Wolfgang Denk" > Cc: ; "Jeff Mann" > > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 10:09 PM > Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] Proposal for a make option to include an > additional stand alone program directory > > >> Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> >>> You cannot link non-GPL code into U-Boot. >> >> What if I use mkimage to merge u-boot.bin with proprietaryfirmware.bin? >> >> If that doesn't work, what if I burn u-boot.bin into flash at some >> location, and then burn >> proprietaryfirmware.bin into flash at another location, and then I >> create an an image file >> by copying all of flash? >> >> It depends on how you define linking. I would say that taking two >> binaries, one from GPL >> code and one from non-GPL code, and just merging them into another >> binary, that cannot be >> a GPL violation. >> > > > If combining U-Boot with the switch binary results in that you can tftp > from any > of the 5 ports , and this is not possible without combining with the > binary, then you > are most likely violating the GPL. I think there's a lot of misunderstanding going on here, and it's probably my fault for not being clear. The non-GPL firmware is not run on the host processor. It is loaded into the memory of an on-board device. What I was considering is making a change to the build process so that when the user built u-boot.bin, if the firmware binary were present, it would merge that into the u-boot.bin binary, for convenience. > If your version of u-boot has any knowledge about program locations > within the closed > binary, or vice versa, then you are most likely violating the GPL. The binary is not being executed by U-Boot, it is being copied into device memory by U-Boot via a loader application. If the loader application is GPL, then I don't see how this is a GPL violation. However, if the loader is not GPL, then I'm not sure. -- Timur Tabi Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale