>> Maybe this was to discourage us from flashing our own code? Who knows. >> If anyone from Dell is listening, you really don't have to bother doing >> that :-) > > Since the firmware shell was based on busybox, GPL compels them to > publish source for at least part of the firmware. Theoretically, they > should be publishing it in the same place as the binary, but this is not > too bad. I'm not sure how long they've been publishing source, but I > couldn't find it when I looked around a couple of years ago.
Sorry, I think you misunderstood what I meant. I was just saying that Dell needn't bother ripping out "secret" parts of the non-GPL'd source before publishing it, because unless there's a backdoor or something in there nothing bad will come of it. If we can reflash our own firmware and get full control of the hardware, what does it matter if we find a few debugging commands in racadm? I've been trying since February to get hold of the DRAC's firmware source (as you can see in the list archives) so I'm certainly glad they've released it at last! I also suspect it hasn't been available for that long, despite the February timestamp on the files. >From what I hear the DRAC6 source code is supposed to be coming next. Cheers, Adam. _______________________________________________ Linux-PowerEdge mailing list [email protected] https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-poweredge Please read the FAQ at http://lists.us.dell.com/faq
