No GPL code doesn't make sense for the Linux drivers. The only place Linux drivers can be used is in a GPL environment. For example there is a 600 line sysfs support skeleton file I want to include. This file is intended to be brought into a driver and then edited. It is a complete waste of time recoding and redebugging that file just to make it BSD compatible when the code won't even run on BSD.
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 10:26:45 -0400, Adam Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Monday 20 September 2004 05:57, Keith Whitwell wrote: > > Jon Smirl wrote: > > > I just checked a small change into DRM CVS that adds sysfs i2c support > > > to the linux radeon driver. The patch includes some GPL licensed code > > > extracted from the Linux kernel. The GPL files are only in the > > > drm/linux directory. No GPL code was added to drm/shared or drm/bsd so > > > the BSD build does not include the GPL code. The two GPL licensed > > > files are clearly marked including warnings not to copy them into the > > > BSD build. > > > > The issue with GPL and drm is as I have stated several times now that we've > > wanted XFree, and now Xorg, to be able to distribute this code as part of > > their tree. > > > > XFree86 had a strong policy against allowing GPL into their tree, I don't > > know what Xorg's stand is. Maybe someone can comment from there? > > I've not heard any discussion to the contrary, so I would assume this is still > the case. > > xc/extras/README claims: > "Packages included here must be redistributable under conditions compatible > with the XFree86 redistribution conditions (see > xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/doc/COPYRIGHT for examples of compatible > licences)." > > Of course that file no longer exists, and hasn't since before XFree86 4.0. > When it did exist, it only made reference to BSD-style licenses: > http://cvsweb.xfree86.org/cvsweb/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/doc/Attic/COPYRIGHT > > So this may be an open policy question still, but I suspect the answer is > still "No GPL code". > > --- > > To be honest, I'd just as soon see Mesa removed from extras/ entirely, but - > besides libGLcore - we can't do that until one of Mesa's build targets > (linux-dri probably) is capable of generating a libGL that acts as a GLX > client. This would involve moving the GLX client code from xc/lib/GL/glx > into Mesa; I understand there's been some resistance to that idea in the > past. > > - ajax > -- Jon Smirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
