On Friday 04 February 2022 21:23:18 PM (+07:00), Måns wrote:
> Hi, > > Well, does GPLv3 not require that a customer should be able to build > the GPLv3 like bash and deploy it to the target? It is not directly > secure-boot but the customer has a boot up sequence that starts with > secure boot and then the rootfs needs to be signed. So it would not be > possible to open up the device to allow a customer to deploy his own > version of bash on the target. But I might have misunderstood GPLv3. I > am not an expert. > > BR > Måns Zigher ermmm no... my understanding is if a device is bootlocked.. grub or secure-boot, then the vendor only needs to provide a way a client having ownership of the device can make, rebuild, duplicate, circumvent the secure-boot. ie... make it undoable/bypassable and as long as they allow users to install their own secure boot keys now im not LAWYER .... However.... if a client can regenerate keys/bootloader/image then i believe your safe. > > Den fre 4 feb. 2022 kl 15:19 skrev Embedded Devel <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > On Friday 04 February 2022 15:53:42 PM (+07:00), Mans Zigher wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > A client of mine wants to have docker on it's product and they are > > > having secure boot enabled which prevents us from having any GPLv3 > > > licensed code on the target. > > Okay, wait, why does enabling secure-boot prevent including GPLv3 packages?? > > Ive never heard this before. > -- Sent with Vivaldi Mail. Download Vivaldi for free at vivaldi.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#7046): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-virtualization/message/7046 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/88903092/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-virtualization/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
