[U-Boot] [PATCH 25/25] x86: Add a README.x86 for U-Boot on x86 support

[Bruce_Leonard at selinc.com]

Hi Simon,

sjg at google.com wrote on 12/05/2014 11:05:30 AM:

> From: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> To: Bruce_Leonard at selinc.com
> Cc: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com>, U-Boot Mailing List <u-
> boot at lists.denx.de>, u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de
> Date: 12/05/2014 11:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 25/25] x86: Add a README.x86 for U-Boot
> on x86 support
> Sent by: sjg at google.com
> 
> Hi Bruce,
> 
> On 5 December 2014 at 11:34,  <Bruce_Leonard at selinc.com> wrote:
> > Hi Simon, Bin,
> >
> > u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de wrote on 12/04/2014 04:03:54 PM:
> >
> >> From: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> >> To: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com>
> >> Cc: U-Boot Mailing List <u-boot at lists.denx.de>
> >> Date: 12/04/2014 04:04 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 25/25] x86: Add a README.x86 for U-Boot
> >> on x86 support
> >> Sent by: u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de
> >>
> >> Hi Bin,
> >>
> >> On 4 December 2014 at 08:04, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com>
> >> > ---
> >> >  doc/README.x86 | 123 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> +++++++++++++
> >> >  1 file changed, 123 insertions(+)
> >> >  create mode 100644 doc/README.x86
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/doc/README.x86 b/doc/README.x86
> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> > index 0000000..a79f510
> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> > +++ b/doc/README.x86
> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
> >> > +#
> >> > +# Copyright (C) 2014, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> >> > +# Copyright (C) 2014, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com>
> >> > +#
> >> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier:     GPL-2.0+
> >> > +#
> >> > +
> >> > +U-Boot on x86
> >> > +=============
> >>
> >> Very nice!
> >>
> >
> > This is all really great work.
> >
> > I do have a question though, and if it's already been asked/answered 
and I
> > missed the thread I apologize for the noise.  Part of the reason we've 
held
> > off on doing this project (other than resources of course :) ) wasa 
concern
> > about licensing.  U-boot is released under the GPL and we're worried 
that by
> > linking in Intel's FSP we're creating a "derived work" that would then
> > require Intel to release the source for the FSP, which they aren't 
going to
> > do and would leave us open to law suits.  Doing it by calls into an 
opaque
> > blob can loosely be defined as a dynamically linked library and 
therefore
> > fall under the GPL exception clause, but our legal department 
considers that
> > a dangerous assumption on our part.
> >
> > Has anyone considered this issue?  I'm not a lawyer so I get lost in 
the
> > legalize of licences pretty fast.
> >
> > Thanks again for all the work.
> 
> Well if you a legal department, that's what you pay them for and they
> should be able to figure this out. Clearly if it were not permitted to
> use the binary blobs in open source software then the blobs wouldn't
> be very useful. But I'm not a lawyer either and am not qualified to
> provide legal advice! It would be useful if you could post what you
> find either way. And if for some reason there is a problem, we could
> take it up with Intel.
> 
> 

Thanks for the info.  We were sort of hoping that either the u-boot 
community or Denx SE may have already addressed this.  Probably what we'll 
have to do is get an Intel lawyer on the phone with a copy of both the GPL 
and the FSP licences and just go through them item by item.  We'll 
feedback to the list what we find out.

Have a good weekend!

V/r
Bruce