Re: [PATCH] Enable writing to ATA devices, fix several bugs

[Javier Martín]

El lun, 21-07-2008 a las 14:49 +0200, Marco Gerards escribió:
> Pavel Roskin <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 20:55 +0200, Marco Gerards wrote:
> >> Pavel Roskin <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> >> > I know.  That's why I'll write it from specifications or maybe I'll
> >> > take it from the GNU/Hurd code.
> >> 
> >> Taking it from Specifications will be better.
> >> 
> >> I think the ATA driver of GNU Mach comes from Linux 2.0 or so.  So
> >> that won't change anything for us ;(.
> >
> > I don't think choosing consistent names could be interpreted as a
> > copyright violation (except by companies like SCO, but then all bets are
> > off).
> 
> No, you are right.  But it means that you have a look at the Linux ATA
> code.  If you copy Linux names into our code, people could claim that
> we looked at Linux and based our code on it.
So what? Aren't both Linux and GRUB under the GPL? That _should_ mean
that we can look at their code and put it into GRUB ("create a
derivative work") either as-is or modified.
> 
> > Anyway, if I ever have a chance to touch the GRUB ATA code again, I'll
> > use FreeBSD as a reference.  Using specification is probably not the
> > best idea because we need GRUB to work on the real life hardware, and we
> > need to be prepared to handle known quirks in popular hardware.
> 
> We were talking about not looking at copyrighted code as a
> reference...  But looking at FreeBSD would be better than looking at
> Linux if we want to avoid possible copyright problems.
I still don't understand this: the GPL includes an irrevocable grant as
long as the license is obeyed. As for copyright problems, Linux has had
several clashes (SCO et al), but in each and every instance people has
raised against the attacker, defended Linux and won in court. I say it
"offers" quite good copyright shielding.

Habbit

signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente