Device drivers and non-disclosure agreements
Posted Oct 9, 2006 23:02 UTC (Mon) by nix
In reply to: Device drivers and non-disclosure agreements
Parent article: Device drivers and non-disclosure agreements
Indeed. Jim Gettys makes the cogent point that there is no alternative to
that part, that Marvell have been as helpful as they could, and that (and
this is what Theo seems to have missed) there is *no* documentation that
is complete enough to write drivers: instead, `the documentation is the
code', and that code is licensed under nasty licenses for reasons (as I
understand it) partially out of Marvell's control.
I'm not sure what Theo would prefer: surely not that the OLPC project die
or be crippled due to the absence of the Marvell part?
to post comments)