Hey, On 08/12/2011 07:42 PM, Christian König wrote: > Am Freitag, den 12.08.2011, 10:49 -0400 schrieb Younes Manton: >> Sorry, by incompatible I didn't mean that you couldn't use them >> together, but that one is more restrictive than the other. Like the >> discussion you quoted states, if you combine MIT and GPL you have to >> satisfy both of them, which means you have to satisfy the GPL. I >> personally don't care that much, but unfortunately with the way >> gallium is built it affects more than just VDPAU. >> >> Every driver in lib/gallium includes that code, including swrast_dri >> (softpipe), r600_dri, etc, and libGL loads those drivers. If you build >> with the swrast config instead of DRI I believe galllium libGL >> statically links with softpipe, so basically my understanding is that >> anyone linking with gallium libGL (both swrast and DRI configs) has to >> satisfy the GPL now. > A crap, your right. I've forgotten that GPL has even a problem when code > is just linked in, compared to being used. > >> Maybe someone else who is more familiar with these sorts of things can >> comment and confirm that this is accurate and whether or not it's a >> problem. > I already asked around in my AMD team, and the general answer was: Oh > fuck I've no idea, please don't give me a headache. I could asked around > a bit more, but I don't think we get a definitive answer before xmas. > > As a short term solution we could compile that code conditionally, and > only enable it when the VDPAU state tracker is enabled. But as the long > term solution the code just needs a rewrite, beside having a license > problem, it is just not very optimal. The original code is something > like a decade old, and is using a whole bunch of quirks which are not > useful by today’s standards (not including the sign in mv tables for > example). ffmpegs/libavs implementation for example is something like > halve the size and even faster, but uses more memory for table lookups. > But that code is also dual licensed under the GPL/LGPL. > > Using LGPL code instead could also be a solution, because very important > parts of Mesa (the GLSL parser for example) is already licensed under > that, but I'm also not an expert with that also. > gstreamer might have a LGPL version, but if we use LGPL, we probably want to move that code to vdpau/g3dvl instead of it being linked in with everything..
~Maarten _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev