On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
Yeah, that would be rather problematic, but anyway, most of the things
move from the XFree86 code to fbdev code, and most often, it is not code
that is copied, but the register information and such. It is always
easier to get specs if you are
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 01:06:23PM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 09:10:22AM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
For several years the mga fb kernel driver has supported dual head and/or
dvi on cards which aren't supported
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 09:10:22AM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
Yeah, that would be rather problematic, but anyway, most of the things
move from the XFree86 code to fbdev code, and most often, it is not code
that is copied, but the register
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 08:13:45AM -0500, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 01:06:23PM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 09:10:22AM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
For several years the
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 01:59:54PM +, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 09:10:22AM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
Yeah, that would be rather problematic, but anyway, most of the things
move from the XFree86 code to fbdev
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 09:10:22AM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
For several years the mga fb kernel driver has supported dual head and/or
dvi on cards which aren't supported by the XFree86 driver (unless you
use the mga_hal). I've wanted to use
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 01:06:23PM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
And, have you asked the mgafb driver author about this ?
You can hardly complain about lack of back traffic if you didn't ask him
about it, and if you did, it would be interesting to this discussion to
know what the
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
Yeah, that would be rather problematic, but anyway, most of the things
move from the XFree86 code to fbdev code, and most often, it is not code
that is copied, but the register information and such. It is always
easier to get specs if you are working for
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 09:10:22AM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
Yeah, that would be rather problematic, but anyway, most of the things
move from the XFree86 code to fbdev code, and most often, it is not code
that is copied, but the register
Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
As I remember it, the pertinent register information here was reverse
engineered, so it is at least arguable that I'd be copying fbdev
intellectual property here if I'd extracted and reused it.
Perhaps I was wrong, but my understanding from my days in a software
house
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 08:25:40PM +0100, Egbert Eich wrote:
Sven Luther writes:
Maybe a decision on both parts on this would be ok ? XFree86 could make
sure the licence of the driver code would not conflict with the GPL,
keeping the old
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 09:10:22AM +, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
For several years the mga fb kernel driver has supported dual head and/or
dvi on cards which aren't supported by the XFree86 driver (unless you
use the mga_hal). I've wanted to use kernel code to add this support to
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Mark Vojkovich
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2004 3:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] Re: [forum] Re: Announcement:
Modification
The Author ?
This is open source code; there may be 27 authors of the relevant file.
In XFree86 code I wouldn't know how to find the author of a file without
looking at that file. My {limited ,mis}understanding of clean room coding
makes me wary of reading any source unless I know that its
Dr. Rich Murphey wrote:
You can take an XFree86 driver, regardless of what the copyright
says, and completely rewrite it as an fbdev driver (which is what
I believe usually happens) and this is not a violation of the
XFree86 copyright or even of the GPL. Copyright doesn't apply to
ideas or
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 08:25:40PM +0100, Egbert Eich wrote:
Sven Luther writes:
Maybe a decision on both parts on this would be ok ? XFree86 could make
sure the licence of the driver code would not conflict with the GPL,
keeping the old one for example, and the fbdev driver authors
16 matches
Mail list logo
