On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 22:34:15 +
brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx wrote:
* The firmware actually has a separate license that reads as follows:
* Firmware is:
* Derived from proprietary unpublished source code,
OK, I wasn't aware of that. With the clear statement
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 01:14, Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote:
* Firmware is:
* Derived from proprietary unpublished source code,
electrical equipment or hardware tools, not text editors. As such, not
all firmware can be expected to have any source code. In this case, as
we
[CC'd -legal as well; you probably want to follow up there.]
On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 05:46:58PM +0200, Daniel Knabl wrote:
Seems to me that Broadcom Inc. does really allow Debian to
re-distribute the included firmware explicitly.
The GPLv2 requires that distributors provide source code in
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 20:41:12 +
brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx wrote:
[CC'd -legal as well; you probably want to follow up there.]
On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 05:46:58PM +0200, Daniel Knabl wrote:
Seems to me that Broadcom Inc. does really allow Debian to
re-distribute the
On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 10:06:55PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 20:41:12 +
brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx wrote:
[CC'd -legal as well; you probably want to follow up there.]
I don't need to be CC'd, thanks. M-F-T set accordingly.
On Thu, Apr 09,
On Apr 10, brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx wrote:
I don't know about you, but I'd much prefer to modify any sort of
program, firmware or not, using C or assembly rather than editing the
binary directly. I suspect that this is the case for any reasonable
programmer. Thus, we
On Fri, 2009-04-10 at 03:32 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Apr 10, brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx wrote:
I don't know about you, but I'd much prefer to modify any sort of
program, firmware or not, using C or assembly rather than editing the
binary directly. I suspect
7 matches
Mail list logo
