From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 23:17:52 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] Is GPLv2 the right license for Buildroot? In-Reply-To: <20130916200135.1724084e@skate> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Mon, 16 Sep 2013 20:01:35 +0200") References: <20130911172709.GB3410@free.fr> <20130912202157.536e5904@skate> <20130912203359.7e650ebe@skate> <52323A54.7020808@mind.be> <20130912221256.GE3362@free.fr> <523388B6.7090305@mind.be> <20130914221613.GA3444@free.fr> <20130916182101.3844a686@skate> <20130916170815.GB3293@free.fr> <20130916200135.1724084e@skate> Message-ID: <87mwncfou7.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: Hi, Thomas> Sure. But in Buildroot, things are more complicated: within Buildroot Thomas> *itself* there may be parts that you have to redistribute (i.e package Thomas> recipes for GPL programs), and some other parts you may not be willing Thomas> to redistribute (i.e package recipes for your own applications, or your Thomas> root filesystem overlay). This makes it quite difficult for a company Thomas> using Buildroot to easily separate what must be distributed from what Thomas> shouldn't be distributed. I can only speak of personal experience, naturally (and you get to work with a lot more companies than I do), but I haven't seen this as a big problem. These things typically don't contain many "secrets". People basically have 2 options: - Integrate their changes in the Buildroot tree and gain the advantages of Buildroot - Or keep it seperate (E.G add the stuff outside buildroot) and be able to keep it secret. -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard