(Yet another) RTEMS License Question

Joel Sherrill joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com
Fri Jul 8 13:40:17 UTC 2011

On 07/07/2011 11:32 PM, Gene Smith wrote:
> I understand that any product sold or distributed containing an
> unmodified RTEMS release does not have to make available the source code
> of the application. This is clear from reading the license. However,
> what is not clear is if there is a requirement to inform the customer
> that RTEMS is present and make available on demand the unmodified RTEMS
> code used in the product?
> Assuming that the answer to the above question is that the unmodified
> RTEMS code tree doesn't have to be provided, what if creation of the
> RTEMS application also requires a new or modified BSP, libcpu or other
> change to internal GPL licensed RTEMS files that are not yet or never
> become a part of an official RTEMS release or tree? Does this possibly
> trigger a requirement to make available to customers this modified RTEMS
> tree used in the product?

No code in the RTEMS source tree (e.g. RTEMS CVS module)
is supposed to licensed in a way that would impose any
obligations or restrictions on an end user.  No advertising,
offering source, relinking kit, etc.

This also applies to newlib and the gcc language support
libraries shipped with the RPMs.

This does NOT necessarily apply to code.  For example,
if you used the RTEMS port of GNU readline or the GNU
Scientific Library then you would have to abide by the
GPL because of that.

I hope that is clear.
> Thanks,
> -gene
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-users mailing list
> rtems-users at rtems.org
> http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-users

Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research&  Development
joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
    Support Available             (256) 722-9985

More information about the users mailing list