Re: Latest acpica

Andrew Grover
2005-10-13T00:00:41Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1504 bytes --]

When you cut through the legalese, the ACPICA license, which is what the
acpica-unix release is released under, is BSD-style. (Proof of this is that
FreeBSD uses it ;-) So there shouldn't be any licensing issues.

As for acpisrc, it is a very specialized tool that works in conjunction with
some shellscripts to Linuxize the code. I don't think it is worth packaging,
since only the guy who ports CA releases to Linux (i.e. Len Brown) really
uses it... but it's there for the curious. (a nit: it doesn't attach GPLv2,
it attaches dual BSD/GPLv2.)

Regards -- Andy (no longer working on acpi, I just want a debian iasl pkg
;-)

On 10/12/05, Mattia Dongili <malattia-k2GhghHVRtY@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 10:37:59AM -0700, Andrew Grover wrote:
> > I am using GNU flex 2.5.31. I was able to get it to build (on x86_64
> even)
> > with the attached patch. I have also attached the warnings, in case
> those
> > are of interest.
> >
> > (Any Debian people want to package iasl?)
>
> I submitted the ITP, but I'm wondering which licence it is supposed to
> be. On the Intel site the Linux package is said to be GPLed but
> downloaded files (and the www licence agreement) don't report that as
> this is the Unix version.
>
> I also gave a shot to the acpisrc tool that moves everything into a
> GPLv2 + CodeStyle clean source tree but the generated source doesn't
> build.
>
> Could anybody clarify it?
>
> Thanks a lot
> --
> mattia
> :wq!
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1827 bytes --]