On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Michael Schwingen<rincew...@discworld.dascon.de> wrote: > Harald Kipp wrote: >> This is easier to implement than what I suggested: Building an >> intermediate LGPL'ed DLL which links OpenOCD with FTD2XX. >> > I don't see how that solves the GPL problem: as soon as the FTD2XX > library is linked into openocd, it is not OK to distribute - having an > intermediate do the linking does not change the legal status, IMHO - but > IANAL. > > As far as I see the situationn, the only clean possibility (except > changing the license) is to have the FTD2XX library in a separate > process, not linked into openocd's address space, which means separating > the functionality and communicating by sockets or similar mechanisms.
I'm not a GPL expert, but this still sounds like trying to circumvent the license problem and is no different than LoadLibrary() vs. implicit LoadLibrary(). There are technical solutions to these GPL problems that are a bit of work, but not terribly hard. I think a good first step would be to accumulate possible solutions and commit them to todo.txt after there is a consensus that they are workable from a license point of view. Once we have a list of GPL-safe solutions, patches can flow.... -- Øyvind Harboe Embedded software and hardware consulting services http://consulting.zylin.com _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
