Thanks Wolfgang.
Just curious.
Why is that dynamically load proprietary library and call APIs in it from
u-boot is violating GPL when Linux allows loadable modules that can be
proprietary? Is'nt this same mechanism?
--
View this message in context:
http://u-boot.10912.n7.nabble.com/u-boot-
>Even if you hard-code addresses in the U-Boot image you would be
>violating the GPL. A non-GPL standalone application must be really
>what the name suggests: standalone. It gets only a very narrow,
>stricltly limited set of services - just enough to ger some early
>initialization and debugging do
Thanks Wolfgang.
>>
>> 1. Is it ok if we implement uboot commands that would call into the
>> standalone application API without violating GPL terms of u-boot? The
>> command returns to the command line after execution. The arguments are
>> passed from the uboot command line.
>No. A standalone
Hi,
We are planning to have a non-GPL standalone application which does some
basic board checks and also holds a authentication key (which we don't want
it to be published). The authentication code is in u-boot and will be
released under GPL.
1. Is it ok if we implement uboot commands that woul
Hi,
I notice that -fno-builtin compile option is defined in config,mk. So I try
to call gcc builtin functions using __builtin_XXX() in my standalone
application. But I always get undefined reference at the end even if I link
libgcc. Can one of the experts help me with this?
Thanks for your help
Wolfgang, Thanks for the quick response.
Suppose, say I add more functions to export/_export.h files and call it from
standalone application. But if I release only the u-boot binary and don't
release the binary of the standalone application should the standalone
application source need to be relea
Hi,
I was going through the document in doc/README.standalone. It says I can
add addition functions to export/_export.h:
" To export some additional function foobar(), the following steps
should be undertaken:
- Ap
7 matches
Mail list logo