OK, so Which bsd and which driver?
corsepiu at faw.uni-ulm.de
Wed Mar 26 20:28:16 UTC 2003
Am Mit, 2003-03-26 um 20.36 schrieb Joel Sherrill:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > Well, the idea of setting up a GPL'ed RTEMS and a non-GPL'ed one has
> > been discussed several times before, but AFAICT hasn't made it, so far
> Out of curiousity, what advantage do you think a pure GPL RTEMS
> version would gain?
* Harvesting Linux ;)
* Being able to use other GPL'ed/LGPL'ed packages.
> I may be getting old
I am not sure who's older, you or me ;)
> but I don't remember discussions of dropping the
> exception RTEMS has to the GPL.
Well, I don't recall such a discussion, but I recall various discussions
on finding ways to allow people contributing incompatibly-licensed code,
such as GPL'ed code, e.g.:
1. Merge GPL'ed code as separate CVS-modules, but add support to
configuration into RTEMS's source tree.
=> We'd have two different RTEMS tarballs, eg. one GPL'ed and one
2. Implement "drop-in packages" to the RTEMS-source-tree.
=> We'd allow users to drop-in any arbitrary packages into the
source-tree, shifting handling of licence issues to their responsibility
(Similar to the effect of using current RTEMS's contrib-packages, such
This kind of discussion had repeatedly popped up every now and then and
up to now has resulted into the contrib-packages and (partially) into
the implementation of the cpukit ...
More information about the users