[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why we need GPL? was: Re: Re: [f-cpu] Re: Project short description
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Andreas Romeyke wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Juergen Goeritz wrote:
> > On the hardware side its a different world. One cannot just
> It is not. The question is what is Software or Sourcecode? It is the way
> to do things to solve a problem, it is an algorithm.
What about the vendor libraries. This is source code too.
What about routing algorithms, crosstalk algorithms that
must be used to get your source into being.
> If we can use a hardware description language, so it changes the way how
> hardware is produced, hardware will be similiar to software in the way of
> Now, we can differ between two things, a general description to do
> something, and a detailled description to do something. You can compare
> the first one with a specification of an interface and the second one
> with a realization of an interface (in software-world).
> The F-CPU-Project is similiar to the first one.
Maybe you are right here but there is one big difference.
Software execution relies on hardware to run the binaries.
Hardware development won't produce any binaries but chips.
What does GPL say about binaries or chips?
What does GPL state for these binaries or chips when it
comes to add other binaries or chip parts? What if one
develops an own program, compiles it and uses it together
with another compiled program in an operating system
(or chip)? Is the operating system automatically to be
If you don't put the sources together - what happens?
Do you still think GPL will work?
> > Therefore my opinion is to use a more open license for
> > all hardware related things. Maybe LGPL is not the best
> > but it is at least a start.
> The GPL is very well, because we have the full control about the
> "interface". The differences between GPL and BSD par example is that GPL
> depends on a "bad" view of human behaviour, and BSD on a "good" view of
> human behaviour, both want be follow the idea "Who uses 10000 lines of
> code, should/must return 10 lines of code".
> Because hardware can be described with "sourcecode", we can use all
> mechanism of software development, too. Because we share our
> knowledge/ideas in the way of software developing, we must protect us and
> the project like well prooved license for free and open software.
> Is not it?
Yes, I agree with protection. But you are focusing on the
source only but hardware will be the chip. Do you want to
prevent 'illegal' f-cpu chips to come to market and how
can GPL manage to protect it?
Just for thinking...
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/