Re: [ECOS] Are copyright assignments detrimental to eCos?

[Jiri Gaisler <jiri at gaisler dot com>]

This is getting interesting. I understand the difference
between LGPL and GPL better now, and I have found the eCos
lining exception part in the license:

// As a special exception, if other files instantiate templates or use macros
// or inline functions from this file, or you compile this file and link it
// with other works to produce a work based on this file, this file does not
// by itself cause the resulting work to be covered by the GNU General Public
// License. However the source code for this file must still be made available
// in accordance with section (3) of the GNU General Public License.


Does this mean that if we contribute some files to eCos under
this license and they end up in eCos Pro, any modifications to
them made by eCosCentric would have to be published and could be
merged back to the open version of eCos. The last sentence seems
to indicate this, I just want be sure.

I have looked at the files in eCos Pro, and majority of it has
the GPL license with the linking exception. Is there anything that
would prevent me from merging updated files from eCos Pro back
to the open CVS version?

Jiri.

Markus Schaber wrote:
> Hi, Jiri,
>
> Jiri Gaisler <jiri@gaisler.com> wrote:
>
> > Using LGPL does not require you ship your firmware as
> > object files and link later. My understanding of LGPL
> > is that you can ship proprietary core linked with LGPL
> > code, without having to open-source the proprietary
> > code. It is only the modifications of the LGPL code
> > you must publish, which is exactly what we are after.
>
> Please read the LGPL carefully.
>
> You stumbled over one of the differences between the LGPL and the "GPL
> with linking exception", as used by eCos or the GCC run time library,
> AFAIR.
>
>
> Regards,
> Markus

--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss