> -----Original Message----- > From: openocd-development-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:openocd- > development-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Xiaofan Chen > Sent: maandag 22 juni 2009 1:59 > To: Zach Welch > Cc: openocd-development@lists.berlios.de > Subject: Re: [Openocd-development] FT2232 & Windows - summary of options > > 2009/6/22 Zach Welch <z...@superlucidity.net>: > > On Sun, 2009-06-21 at 13:20 -0700, David Brownell wrote: > >> On Sunday 21 June 2009, Audrius Urmanavičius wrote: > >> > I can also second Xiaofan, who offers distribution of .zip file with > >> > Cygwin building environment set up, probably with shell script that > >> > does `./bootstrap`, `./configure --with-ftd2xx-blahblah` and `make` > >> > there, so that Windows users with (almost) no linux experience could > >> > build openocd themselves in minutes. > >> > >> I can't see any particular issue with such a "build kit". > >> Of course it shouldn't include binaries of any kind. > >> > >> It should however be exactly equivalent to carefully > >> written build instructions that include fetching the > >> source (maybe both "release 0.2.0" or "SVN-head" options) > >> and libraries. > > > > Finally!! Someone came up with one of the legal workarounds! > > > > A build script can be distributed that automatically fetches every > > single component (including the compilers, if necessary) and builds all > > of the source code from scratch.
This doesn't sound like a viable option. Way too complicated. Like others said: you really don't want this mailing list flooded with questions about installing OpenOCD. I must say there are very few questions about the installation op OpenOCD. This indicates the current installation process and documentation are fine. Lets not change that. > > This is simply a matter of doing the work, but I have done this for past > > projects for exactly these same reasons. This may seem like extra work, > > but the resulting distribution complies with the terms of the GPL. > > > > If we had fully modular drivers, it would even be possible to distribute > > a build kit that compiles _only_ the FTD2XX driver, which can be > > installed into OpenOCD's (forthcoming) driver module directory. > > > > Glad to heat that build-kit idea is acceptable by GPL and you two. > Cygwin is not small. So it is good to distribute is as a zip file. > The a shell script to fetch OpenOCD and FTD2XX driver > and build OpenOCD can be put in to automatic the job. As far as I can understand the problem is that OpenOCD cannot be distributed as a Windows binary linked against a USB device driver which is non-GPL code. This makes me wonder how the executable is to be run on Windows. Somewhere the code must be linked against Microsoft's APIs which are non-GPL as well. So what is the difference between a non-GPL USB device driver and the Windows APIs? According to Zach the GPL chain extends up and down infinitely but I don't think that is the case. So it seems there are some (practical) boundaries to GPL after all. Nico Coesel _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
