On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Michael Schwingen<rincew...@discworld.dascon.de> wrote: > 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.
My favourite is to introduce a serialized protocol for JTAG that can work over TCP/IP, pipes, even fn calls... This has been discussed before and could be *very* useful for other stuff, including remote access to targets for debug purposes... OpenOCD would itself also implement this as a server to forwarding it to the underlying driver, acting as the server. -- 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
