On 6/18/07, David T. L. Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Relax, thats not going to happen. Linus dont want gpl v3 for the kernel. > > I dont want to buy boxes like the Tivo though. > So far it is. But how about Samba & NTFS-3g? Any component we used in our product changes to GPLv3 would give us a headache.
Ouch!!! Maybe you need to look for an alternative.
Sigma Designs 863X platform requires the kernel image to be signed so that the bootloader boots it. I foresee this conflict of GPLv3 and signed kernel. I think I could not disclose the key for signing a kernel to end users so that they can build their kernel. I may need to build a signed 2nd stage bootloader to boot unsigned kernel image. It will slow down the boot process in turn.
They can still get you for that though. I dont think you need to do two stage booting. As long as you have the kernel source available somewhere in a form that anybody verify using signatures. All patches will have to go through you though. And users cant help you with the closed source code.
I also afraid that I breaks the license agreement with Sigma Designs and with Microsoft, for WMV DRM, if I let users run their own kernel on the product.
between an unstoppable object and immovable rock... -- Lay low and nourish in obscurity _______________________________________________ uClinux-dev mailing list uClinux-dev@uclinux.org http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org To unsubscribe see: http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
