From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1KKxAs-0002Cx-BQ for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:19:42 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KKxAq-0002Bc-Ho for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:19:40 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KKxAn-00028r-1N for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:19:39 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55188 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KKxAm-00028h-Pu for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:19:36 -0400 Received: from smtp-vbr5.xs4all.nl ([194.109.24.25]:4020) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KKxAl-0005Y1-Rn for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:19:36 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (249-174.surfsnel.dsl.internl.net [145.99.174.249]) by smtp-vbr5.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m6LFJX5Q083053 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:19:33 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mgerards@xs4all.nl) From: Marco Gerards To: The development of GRUB 2 References: <20080703001716.13881.1754.stgit@dv.roinet.com> <87lk0i6cxo.fsf@xs4all.nl> <1215118211.2734.8.camel@dv> <871w2927ia.fsf@xs4all.nl> <20080704130732.xtvmz0baecc04wc8-cebfxv@webmail.spamcop.net> <87iqv0idwz.fsf@xs4all.nl> <1216585492.14762.9.camel@dv> <87ej5n9zcq.fsf@xs4all.nl> <1216646384.8334.163.camel@localhost> Mail-Copies-To: mgerards@xs4all.nl Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:20:26 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1216646384.8334.163.camel@localhost> (Javier =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mart=EDn's?= message of "Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:19:44 +0200") Message-ID: <87abgb9scl.fsf@xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: FreeBSD 4.6-4.9 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable writing to ATA devices, fix several bugs X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:19:40 -0000 Javier Mart=C3=ADn writes: > El lun, 21-07-2008 a las 14:49 +0200, Marco Gerards escribi=C3=B3: >> Pavel Roskin writes: >>=20 >> > On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 20:55 +0200, Marco Gerards wrote: >> >> Pavel Roskin writes: >> > >> >> > I know. That's why I'll write it from specifications or maybe I'll >> >> > take it from the GNU/Hurd code. >> >>=20 >> >> Taking it from Specifications will be better. >> >>=20 >> >> I think the ATA driver of GNU Mach comes from Linux 2.0 or so. So >> >> that won't change anything for us ;(. >> > >> > I don't think choosing consistent names could be interpreted as a >> > copyright violation (except by companies like SCO, but then all bets a= re >> > off). >>=20 >> No, you are right. But it means that you have a look at the Linux ATA >> code. If you copy Linux names into our code, people could claim that >> we looked at Linux and based our code on it. > So what? =EF=BB=BFAren't both Linux and GRUB under the GPL? That _should_= mean > that we can look at their code and put it into GRUB ("create a > derivative work") either as-is or modified. For GRUB 2 we require copyright assignments. =20 >> > Anyway, if I ever have a chance to touch the GRUB ATA code again, I'll >> > use FreeBSD as a reference. Using specification is probably not the >> > best idea because we need GRUB to work on the real life hardware, and = we >> > need to be prepared to handle known quirks in popular hardware. >>=20 >> We were talking about not looking at copyrighted code as a >> reference... But looking at FreeBSD would be better than looking at >> Linux if we want to avoid possible copyright problems. > I still don't understand this: the GPL includes an irrevocable grant as > long as the license is obeyed. As for copyright problems, Linux has had > several clashes (SCO et al), but in each and every instance people has > raised against the attacker, defended Linux and won in court. I say it > "offers" quite good copyright shielding. This isn't about licenses. This is about copyright. -- Marco