On 1/22/16, 1:45 AM, "Panu Matilainen" <pmatilai at redhat.com> wrote:
>On 01/21/2016 05:03 PM, Wiles, Keith wrote:
>> On 1/21/16, 2:46 AM, "Panu Matilainen" <pmatilai at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/20/2016 06:26 PM, Wiles, Keith wrote:
>>>> On 1/20/16, 12:32 AM, "dev on behalf of Matthew Hall" <dev-bounces at
>>>> dpdk.org on behalf of mhall at mhcomputing.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the pktgen code is reindented I am finding time to read through it
>>>>> and experiment and see if I can get it working.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have issues with the init process of pktgen. It is difficult to debug
>>>>> it because the init code does a lot of very scary stuff to the terminal
>>>>> control / TTY device at inconvenient times in an inconvenient order, and
>>>>> in the process damages the debug output and damages the screen of your
>>>>> GDB without doing weird things to run GDB on a different TTY.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course I am willing to contribute patches and not just complain, but
>>>>> first I need some help to follow what is going on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the problematic call-flow with some explanation what went wrong
>>>>> trying it on some community machines outside of its original environment:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) it calls printf("\n%s %s\n", wr_copyright_msg(), wr_powered_by());
>>>>> which dumps tons of weird boilerplate of licenses, copyrights, code
>>>>> creator, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is open source and everybody that matters already knows who coded it,
>>>>> so is this stuff really that important? This gets in the way when you
>>>>> are trying to work on it and I just have to comment it out.
>>>>
>>>> One problem is a number of people wanted to steal the code and use in
>>>> a paid application, so the copyright is some what a requirement.
>>>
>>> In that case, why is it under a BSD'ish license instead of something
>>> like GPL that's designed to prevent it in the first place? Might be too
>>> late to change it by now, just wondering.
>>
>> DPDK is BSD, so you can not use a GPL application with DPDK (I think)
>
>Well I sure hope the license is not chosen by that assumption. Why
>assume when you can trivially check, eg:
>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
>
>DPDK itself is under the very lax 3-clause BSD license which is
>compatible with the GPL. The 4-clause "advertising license" used by
>pktgen is not. But its not the license I'm complaining about.
>
>> anyway I can try to speed you the screens, but does it really matter
>> as these are only at startup and I normally leave pktgen running for
>> long periods of time. The extra time at the start does not seem to
>> be a big issue, right?
>
>We wouldn't be discussing this if it was not an issue. It is offensive
>enough to turn away both users and contributors, and merely speeding up
>a bit is not going to make it a whole lot better.
>
>As I (and now others as well) already suggested changing it to a one
>line printout is what would make worlds of difference while still
>complying with the license AFAICT. The license text requires printing
>out the copyright notice, it does not say anything about rendering it in
>full-screen ascii-art, or printing out the entire license.
Thank you Panu for your input, I will think about.
>
> - Panu -
>
Regards,
Keith
