Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264066AbUCZPxU (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:53:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264065AbUCZPxU (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:53:20 -0500 Received: from boogie.lpds.sztaki.hu ([193.225.12.226]:64130 "EHLO boogie.lpds.sztaki.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264068AbUCZPxQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:53:16 -0500 Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 16:53:15 +0100 From: Gabor Gombas To: Stefan Smietanowski Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Binary-only firmware covered by the GPL? Message-ID: <20040326155315.GA8724@boogie.lpds.sztaki.hu> References: <20040325225423.GT9248@cheney.cx> <20040326131629.GB26910@zombie.inka.de> <40643BFA.1000302@stesmi.com> <20040326142917.GB30664@zombie.inka.de> <40644071.9090900@stesmi.com> <20040326145506.GA31759@zombie.inka.de> <40644629.9090602@stesmi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40644629.9090602@stesmi.com> X-Copyright: Forwarding or publishing without permission is prohibited. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1725 Lines: 37 On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 04:03:05PM +0100, Stefan Smietanowski wrote: > To draw a parallel between a WAV or PNG file (a well-known standard) > to a firmware for a specific card (a closed standard) is thin. > > Even though I can modify a PNG or WAV file using a hex editor it > is _NOT_ preferred form, and neither is modifying the firmware > using a hex editor, neither to me nor to the people doing the cards. You are mixing the preferred form with the editor. If you do not have the GIMP (or other similar tool) then you _do_ have to edit the PNG file with a hex editor, but the binary PNG file is still the preferred form for editing. If a firmware author uses a proprietary tool that reads the binary firmware image, let's the user edit it, and again writes out a binary image, then that binary image _is_ the preferred form simply because no other form exists. And it is completely irrelevant if the proprietaty editor represented the firmware image on the screen in a high-level language or as assembler code or as graphics or as anything else. So unless you can _prove_ that the author of the firmware image does indeed use some other form as the source of the image (guessing is not enough), this whole thread is meaningless. Gabor -- --------------------------------------------------------- MTA SZTAKI Computer and Automation Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences --------------------------------------------------------- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/