On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 12:44:35AM +0200, Rafa?? Mi??ecki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recently received a hint that it would be nice/expected to have DTS
> files licensed under BSD.
I've not done a count, but i think you will find that most device tree
files use X11 as the second license, not BSD.
On 05/15/2016 12:44 AM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> Hi,
..
> Another problem is text of BSD license
>
> 1) Some BSD 2-clause licensed sources don't link to its content.
>
> In case of GPLv2 some sources simply mention this license and refer to
> COPYING. Few examples:
> a) drivers/bcma/main.c
[Adding linux-doc@ which I probably should use from the beginning]
On 15 May 2016 at 04:43, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 12:44:35AM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>
>> I recently received a hint that it would be nice/expected to have DTS
>> files licensed under BSD. I had no exper
On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 12:44:35AM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>
> I recently received a hint that it would be nice/expected to have DTS
> files licensed under BSD. I had no experience with BSD, so I started
> looking at this and the way kernel parts use it.
There is a lot of sloppiness in some o
Hi,
I recently received a hint that it would be nice/expected to have DTS
files licensed under BSD. I had no experience with BSD, so I started
looking at this and the way kernel parts use it.
Obviously Linux kernel is licensed under GPLv2, so all its code has to
use GPLv2 compatible license. I fo
5 matches
Mail list logo
