qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/3] Add BIOS splash image support


From: Jan Kiszka
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/3] Add BIOS splash image support
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:30:36 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080226 SUSE/2.0.0.12-1.1 Thunderbird/2.0.0.12 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Paul Brook wrote:
>>  
>>>> BTW, why does qemu not carry all bochs bios source? For reference, but
>>>> also to fully comply with the LGPL (pointing to the original source is
>>>> not sufficient when delivering binaries - like e.g. bios.bin...).
>>>>       
>>> If this is really an issue, then I strongly suggest we fix it by
>>> moving the bios into its own project, and have everyone fetch it from
>>> there.
>>>     
>>
>> Qemu distributes binaries that have been generated from LGPLed sources
>> (this is at least the case for bochs, one would have to check the
>> situation for the other firmware images), so it has to provide the
>> corresponding source code according to the license terms.
> 
> You are not qualified to make the statement "has to".  This is a legal
> issue and depends on how the GPL is interpreted.  The FSF provides a set
> of guidelines and so does Debian.  Debian's guidelines are more
> extreme.  If you look at the FSF FAQ on this subject, the main issue is
> ensuring that the source code is always available.
> 
> Since Bochs is on SF, as long as we ensure that the version we base on
> is always available, you could certainly conclude that's enough.

Well, I guess we are both not qualified to finally judge over this. But
this is not my point.

> 
> But please, this is not an issue worth even discussing here.  It is only
> relevant for people distributing QEMU and it's up to those people to
> consult with their legal teams to determine whether they need to do
> anything special.

And why complicating things downstream when it can be fixed upstream?
Because it is only a legal issue? As a redistributor of OSS who cares a
lot about such issues, you have a lot of "fun" getting things right when
upstream forgot it.

But as it looks like, there is a consensus on changing the situation
anyway. And up to now, no animal should have been harmed, too.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 26
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux




reply via email to

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