From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 05:40:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 05:40:24 -0500 Received: from cc78409-a.hnglo1.ov.home.nl ([212.120.97.185]:25790 "EHLO dexter.hensema.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 05:40:23 -0500 From: Erik Hensema Subject: Re: Preferred way to load non-free firmware Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 10:51:32 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Reply-To: erik@hensema.net User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Pavel Roskin (proski@gnu.org) wrote: > 7) Encode the firmware into a header file, add it to the driver and > pretend that the copyright issue doesn't exist (like it's done in the > Keyspan USB driver). It doesn't exist. At lost, not on the part of Linux. The license of the firmware may prohibit it. The way I interpret the GPL you may link _any_ _data_ into a GPL'ed program. Since this firmware is _data_ from the point of view of the kernel (eg. the stream of execution never enters the firmware and it isn't mapped to a text segment) there shouldn't be any problem. It may still be preferable to choose another option, but linking the firmware into a module has the advantage of the user being able to do module autoloading without further configuration (eg. post-install lines in modules.conf). -- Erik Hensema