> > The entire point of the GPL is that an end user who > > receives GPL'd software should be able to take it apart, modify it, > > put it back together, and run the result. > > Yes, but only what is part of the GPLed program. Does that mean a separation of GPL programs and proprietary programs would provide a clean solution? Perhaps one GPL firmware image and one proprietary firmware image? > > I read about 'tivoization' and I guess that's the thing I'm actually > > referring to, isn't it? And as far as I read that's a point which was > > enforced especially with GPLv3. > > Are you signing the firmware in a way that is checked at boot and won't > allow the boot to proceed if the signatures do not check ? > > If so then there is a difference between GPLv2 and GPLv3 but has nothing > to do with aggregation, nor with release the source code of other > unrelated components. Interesting part. Let's say yes, how differ v2 and v3 if I signed my firmware so that none other than my own firmware was bootable? -Simon. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
