Øyvind Harboe wrote: >> 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(). > If you simply wrap FTD2XX calls in network packets, then I agree.
If the protocol used is more general and not FTD2XX-specific, it should be OK, especially if multiple implementations for different targets exist. cu Michael _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
