Re: Binary-only firmware covered by the GPL?

[Stefan Smietanowski <stesmi@stesmi.com>]

Eduard Bloch wrote:

> #include <hallo.h>
> * David Schwartz [Thu, Mar 25 2004, 04:41:23PM]:
> 
> 
>>>IMHO code that can be compiled would probably be the preferred form
>>>of the work.
>>
>>	You are seriously arguing that the obfuscated binary of the firmware is the
>>preferred form of the firmware for the purpose of making modifications to
>>it?!
> 
> 
> Yes, the driver authors PREFERS to make the changes on the C source
> code, he never has to modify the firmware. Exactly what the GPL
> requests, where is your problem?

But the firmware didn't appear out of thin air - someone wrote it
somehow. If that's using a hex editor or inside the C code doesn't
matter, but most likely they used some other language like either
C or assembly (no, not all firmware is written using assembly), and
there are cases where some are in fact written using a hex editor but
I can't remember any that has been for the last 30 or so years but
I'm sure there has been cases where there hasn't been a working
assembler.

// Stefan