From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I53xy-0007UN-Jn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 14:16:10 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I53xx-0007UB-KP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 14:16:09 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I53xx-0007U8-Fi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 14:16:09 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.175]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I53xw-0002Jj-Pd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 14:16:08 -0400 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m2so840176uge for ; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 11:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:16:07 +0200 From: "andrzej zaborowski" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Porting QEMU to PalmOS In-Reply-To: <200707011220.45306.luke@dashjr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <748971.45217.qm@web54607.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <200707011220.45306.luke@dashjr.org> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 01/07/07, Luke-Jr wrote: > On Sunday 01 July 2007 07:29, andrzej zaborowski wrote: > > On 5/24/07, sinisa marovic wrote: > > > I'm afraid I will have to dissapoint you: it will be only isapc with no > > > networking or other fancy devices. Main goal is the ability to run dos > > > games. I do not know how familiar are you with PalmOS developer support. > > > It is poor, gcc lack many important functions that have to be written > > > from scratch. When I ported dosbox (which is written in c++) Referring to this sentence ^ > > > > (Happily violating the GPL) > > > > Will the qemu port also be binary only? > > What did he say that violates the GPL? Just because he is only porting the > isapc stuff? I don't know any part of the GPL saying "when you port this, you > must port all the features"... Or would such a port be inherently a violation > due to system libraries being incompatible with the [L]GPL? Releasing the dosbox PalmOS binary and not releasing the sources even when explicitly asked to is a violation of GPL and of the policy of sourceforge.net and a couple of other websites on which the binary appears. Regards