[U-Boot] U-book and GPLv3? (fwd)

[Scott Wood]

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 06:33:53PM +0200, Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Also this is one of the objections worded on the mailing list, namely
> that such a cooperation will be impossible in the future if U-Boot moves
> to GPLv3.
> 
> As a base for reasonable discussion, I think we need to evaluate those
> claims and back them up by actual figures.  Only then the real effort
> needed to move and the potential loss of "code immigration" can be
> estimated.

The NAND subsystem is from Linux and is GPL v2 only, as is the
u-boot-specific NAND code in drivers/mtd/nand.  nand_ecc.c is an
exception, which not only has the "or later" language but also has an
exception that makes it non-viral.

env_nand.c is v2-or-later.
cmd_nand.c has no explicit license.

In summary: If you switch to v3, you lose much of NAND.  Unless RMS
volunteers to rewrite it. :-)

> > Is there any chance of convincing those authors to change that?
> 
> Apart from the the above reasons, currently most people who voiced their
> opinion (not too many right now) oppose the move.  The reasoning seems
> to be that companies using U-Boot inside a commercial product consider
> it to be "a neccessary precondition to only accept blessed firmware
> upgrades" (my wording).  What motivates this argument is not completely
> clear to me.  Maybe it is fear of being liable as a product vendor to
> faulty sw upgrades.

Regardless of what motivates it, people who sell hardware to such
customers (and who also contribute to u-boot) may not want to risk losing
that business by pushing GPLv3 on them.

-Scott