On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 02:52:48AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > What if TiVo had put the kernel in a burned-in ROM (not flash, or on a > > flash ROM with no provision for reprogramming it)? Would that also > > violate the "spirit" of the GPL? Must any device that wishes to include > > GPL code include additional hardware to support replacing that code > > (even if that hardware is otherwise superfluous)? > > As a PS to the GPL3 comment here is the basic difference > > ROM - I can't modify the code on the device > The creator can't modify the code further on the device > > Tivo - I can't modify the code on the device > The owner can modify the code
Tivo gets sick of the endless flamewars on lkml, signs a copy of QNX, pushes it out to the hardware. No more Linux on Tivo. You also can't replace that but Tivo can. As I see it the two are completely orthagonal: a) Can anyone but the manufacturer upload new software into a a device without taking extreme measures (soldering a new public-key-containing-chip onto the board) b) Is the software currently installed on a device licenced under a rule which requires the distributor to also distribute source code upon request. Now I think it would reasonable to ask that the source code be able to be built by [same compiler, same flags, same ...] to produce an identical binary to the one running on the device so you can confirm that it's exactly the same code. That's separate from being able to upload a changed binary. Bron. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
