On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 15:20 -0400, Bake Timmons wrote: > > Great. Thanks, Bake. Last question, and then this directory is done > > (sorry, I probably should have put this all on one email). > > http://wiki.gnewsense.org/Kernel/Ubuntu-hardy-linux-ubuntu-modules-2-6-24-16-23--ubuntu--media--cx88--cx88-tvaudio-c > > has the following introduction: > > > > Lot of voodoo here. Even the data sheet doesn't help to > > understand what is going on here, the documentation for the audio > > part of the cx2388x chip is *very* bad. > > > > Some of this comes from party done linux driver sources I got from > > [undocumented]. > > > > Some comes from the dscaler sources, one of the dscaler driver guy > > works > > for Conexant ... > > > > And it has long static structs like this: > >
<trim code> > > There doesn't seem to be any other signs of firmware. > > A relatively interesting section, huh Peter? :) > > Yeah, I noticed that bit also. I doubt that the struct is a problem, > since those values seem to have to do with *high-level* > characteristics of a device and not low-level machine code of some > chip. The comment about it being voodoo is interesting and suggests > the kind of reverse engineering work that we might find in some > drivers. This can be a gray area wrt to licensing, but I think that > it is OK here. > I'd agree with this. > The more worrying part to me is the vague statement about where the > code comes from. You might feel like double checking with the author, > but I am not worried enough about this case to think of it as a > problem. I did a little digging around on the net about cx88 but > spotted no doubts regarding its licensing. The bits i do worry about is (as i suspect was the case for you) this: > > > > > > Some of this comes from party done linux driver sources I got from > > > [undocumented]. Is this [undocumented] a quote (eg, does it really say that?) if so it means we cant track down the copyright holder or licence .... > > > Some comes from the dscaler sources, one of the dscaler driver guy > > > works > > > for Conexant ... Which should be ok... i would think...? kk -- Karl Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ gNewSense-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users
