On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 11:57 PM, Steven Toth <stoth@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Markus Rechberger wrote: >> >> On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Steven Toth <stoth@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> barry bouwsma wrote: >>>> >>>> --- On Sun, 9/14/08, Steven Toth <stoth@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>>> is that the BSD folks can't port the GPL license into BSD because it's >>>>> not compatible. >>>> >>>> I don't want to see any religious war here (trimmed to dvb >>>> list), but... >>>> >>>> There is GPL code distributed as part of *BSD sources, >>>> as you can see by reading the licensing in, for example, >>>> $ ls /lost+found/CVSUP/BSD/FreeBSD.cvs/src/sys/gnu/dev/sound/pci/ >>>> Attic emu10k1-alsa.h,v maestro3_reg.h,v p17v-alsa.h,v >>>> csaimg.h,v maestro3_dsp.h,v p16v-alsa.h,v >>> >>> Interesting. >>> >>>> >>>>> I owe it to myself to spend somehime reading the BSD licencing. Maybe >>>>> the GPL is compatible with BSD. >>>> >>>> It all depends on the intended use -- whether for optional >>>> kernel components as above. In the distributions, though, >>>> it's kept separated. >>>> >>>> It's also possible to dual-licence source, and I see a good >>>> number of such files in NetBSD under, as an example, >>>> /lost+found/CVSUP/BSD/NetBSD.cvs/src/sys/dev/ic/ >>> >>> I'm be quite happy to grant a second license on my work the the BSD >>> guys, as the copyright owner I can do that. The legal stuff gets messy >>> quickly and I don't claim to understand all of it. >>> >> >> Great move Steven! Can we move the TDA10048 code over, maybe adding >> a note that it's dual licensed would be nice? > > In principle yes. > > I'd like to see an example of dual license just to make sure it has no nasty > side effects. > > Can you point me at one of your dual-license drivers so I can review the > wording? > videodev2.h is also dual licensed. Markus > Regards, > > Steve > > _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
