[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches

From: Weddington, Eric
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 16:43:28 +0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Georg-Johann Lay [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 10:39 AM
> To: Weddington, Eric
> Cc: Joerg Wunsch; address@hidden; Praveen, Vidya; Wunsch, Joerg
> Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Porting Atmel patches
> Weddington, Eric schrieb:
> >> Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch
> >>
> >>> The FSF only allows changes of 10 lines or less in a patch, if
> >>> there is no copyright assignment on file.
> >> I thought with the recent changes, adding a new AVR device is
> >> merely going to be a one-liner (a change to avr-devices.c)?
> >
> > Sure, it's now easier to add devices. But device support also needs
> > the I/O header file in avr-libc, and no one else can submit that
> > except Atmel.
> Ah, interesting.  Does this mean avr-libc is owned / hosted by Atmel now?

No, it never has been owned by Atmel.

But, sorry let me make myself a little clearer:

Atmel has generated I/O header files to match the new devices. Those header 
files are copyright by Atmel. So, *those* files would have to be submitted to 

However, if someone else wanted to submit I/O header files, they would have to 
write/generate them themselves, separate from Atmel. They could submit their 
work to avr-libc and go through the process of getting them accepted.

What can't happen is having someone outside of Atmel, submit header files that 
are copyright by Atmel, because Atmel owns that copyright and must license them 
and submit them to avr-libc for acceptance.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]