[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 08:22:19 +0100 Simon Waters <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Neil Williams wrote: > > > > GPLv3 won't give you a means to get modifications onto the device > > either. > > It is specifically required in GPLv3 that the procedure to do this is > supplied for such a device where the original supplier can modify the > software on the device. So in this case a procedure would have to be > supplied that isn't "a hack". Not true if the original procedure itself is a series of hacks - all publicly documented. There's no requirement for an easy-to-use method that would work without specialist knowledge and possibly specialist tools, as long as those tools are available from third-parties or suitable for DIY construction. > Whilst in this specific case it might not be a hack, I don't see that > Simon in wrong in thinking a GPLv3 kernel wouldn't be a help for these > matters. Not necessarily. All it really does is put the sources out there together with a few Wiki pages - you still need to know how to build the entire image and how to get that image onto the device. Yes, that would be documented somewhere but it does not need to be something that any end-user would understand. Such methods are commonplace and expected but have nothing to do with the desktop model of end-user installers. The original question is whether a typical user can get modifications onto the device and the availability of the sources and a documented procedure does not make that any more likely than it was before because it depends entirely on what is seen as the skill set of a typical user. Yes, it's good that those who can get a modified image onto the device are not actively prevented from running such an image due to constraints like "signed code" or similar but that provision does not make it any easier to get your modifications onto the device itself. It just ensures that once on, the modified code is not prevented from executing. It certainly does not mandate that some friendly installation method is constructed where none exists beforehand. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
Attachment:
pgpcEN8KUmX5b.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html