| |||||||||||||
Linux-2.6.33-libre releasedLinux-2.6.33-libre releasedPosted Mar 1, 2010 21:22 UTC (Mon) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955)In reply to: Linux-2.6.33-libre released by josh Parent article: Linux-2.6.33-libre released Not only do the linux-libre break request_firmware() but they seem to strip out every table of numbers they don't understand. In many cases these are reverse-engineered lists of register initialisations which are the preferred form for modification (they are not the ideal form, but the driver developer is not hiding anything).
(Log in to post comments)
Linux-2.6.33-libre released Posted Mar 2, 2010 6:03 UTC (Tue) by lxoliva (subscriber, #40702) [Link]
The only cases in which I know I removed reverse-engineered lists of registers were cases in which they had been copied literally (through mmio dumps) from non-Free drivers, and included without permission from the copyright holder.
I try really hard to tell code from data. It isn't always easy, and sometimes the developers don't supply enough information to tell one case from the other. In such cases, I often take a conservative approach, in the hope that someone with the device will be able to dig out the info and let me know that the bits are fine to include. I remember some such case regarding rtl8187 drivers, maybe 1.5 year ago or so. Those bits were later determined to be non-software, and thus perfectly fine.
If you know of any other examples, I'd be delighted to mark them as false positives. Please let us know at linux-libre@fsfla.org. Thanks!
Linux-2.6.33-libre released Posted Mar 3, 2010 0:35 UTC (Wed) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955) [Link] The only cases in which I know I removed reverse-engineered lists of registers were cases in which they had been copied literally (through mmio dumps) from non-Free drivers, and included without permission from the copyright holder. Whatever makes you think these are copyrightable?
How to tell whether an incomprehensible stream of bits is copyrightable Posted Mar 3, 2010 6:24 UTC (Wed) by lxoliva (subscriber, #40702) [Link]
I can't tell without having the faintest idea of what it is, or at least of how much creative work went into it. Do you have any tips to share in this regard?
In general, if something is very regular, I take it as non-creative and thus not copyrightable, but if it's sufficiently random that it could be code with creativity involved, it wouldn't be responsible to say it's GPLed unless whoever came up with it says so.
|
|||||||||||||