From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxim Grigoriev Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 10:31:45 -0700 Subject: [Buildroot] [git commit] CHANGES: add #163 + #473 In-Reply-To: <87r5w6ur50.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> References: <20090724055230.2080B77660@busybox.osuosl.org> <20090724110230.3f51597a@surf> <87zlauutcd.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <20090724153528.7103ad9d@surf> <87r5w6ur50.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> Message-ID: <4A69F001.9020304@tensilica.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Thomas> I'm concerned by the licensing of Thomas> target/xtensa/xt-buildroot-overlay-install, since this file Thomas> states: Thomas> +# Copyright (c) 2003-2008 by Tensilica Inc. ALL RIGHTS Thomas> +RESERVED. # These coded instructions, statements, and Thomas> +computer programs are the # copyrighted works and Thomas> +confidential proprietary information of Tensilica Inc. >> Yes, that doesn't fly with the GPL requirements. Maxim, is it OK with >> you to get rid of that header? Absolutely. I am sorry for any inconvenience. -- Maxim Peter Korsgaard wrote: >>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: >>>>>> > > Hi, > > >> I agree that the xtensa stuff is "special" in various ways, but I > >> think it's more productive to get it into git and then work on > >> getting it cleaned up more, instead of having it gather dust in > >> bugzilla. > > Thomas> Ok, fair enough. Reading the patches again, they don't look > Thomas> too invasive after all. > > No, it is pretty much self contained. > > Thomas> I'm concerned by the licensing of > Thomas> target/xtensa/xt-buildroot-overlay-install, since this file > Thomas> states: > > Thomas> +# Copyright (c) 2003-2008 by Tensilica Inc. ALL RIGHTS > Thomas> +RESERVED. # These coded instructions, statements, and > Thomas> +computer programs are the # copyrighted works and > Thomas> +confidential proprietary information of Tensilica Inc. > > Yes, that doesn't fly with the GPL requirements. Maxim, is it OK with > you to get rid of that header? > > Thomas> BTW, was Perl already a host dependency to run Buildroot ? > > Well, it is indirectly as you need Perl to build Linux + a number of > packages, but nothing in buildroot self was using Perl. > >