[ale] OpenBSD in embedded systems

Christopher Fowler cfowler at outpostsentinel.com
Wed Feb 15 21:40:08 EST 2006


I'm not trying to keep people from running Linux.  They can boot our
kernel all they want.  But init will fail.  init does the serial check
and we wrote init from the ground up.

On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 21:26 -0500, Pat Regan wrote:
> Christopher Fowler wrote:
> > #1 is not fully defined.  The main issue is with dynamic linking.  RMS
> > would like all programs that dynamically link with GPL libraries to be
> > open.  IMO this is viral.  
> > 
> 
> I should probably say that I have not read the text of the current
> revision of the proposed GPL v3.
> 
> > #2 is DRM.  DRM is a broad definition.  In our device we use a technique
> > of matching a serial number stored on flash with numbers in the
> > hardware.  This prevents anyone from copying the software off the unit
> > and running on standard PC hardware.  This could be considered DRM and
> > GPLv3 could make it wrong.  
> > 
> 
> It sounds like you may be doing the opposite of what the DRM additions
> to the GPL are trying to prevent.  However, the quoted blurbs of the GPL
> v3 that I have read don't seem to make it very clear.
> 
> Is your serial number check in the kernel?  If it isn't, it doesn't
> matter what the GPL says.
> 
> Anyway...  I think I understand what RMS is trying to accomplish with
> the new GPL.  I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong :).
> 
> Today, lets say you want to be sneaky and try to make money off of some
> GPL software.  Somehow you make a bootable Linux disc with a running
> copy of XFree86 and Pingus.  You pay some money to Sony, they sign your
> disc, and it then becomes bootable on a PS2.
> 
> You can give away the source all you like, but no one else will be able
> to build a working binary for the PS2.  Technically, this can happen today.
> 
> Tomorrow, your WRT54G, Tivo, or something we haven't seen yet will
> require binaries to be signed in order to run.
> 
> I understand that this doesn't really address your issues.
> 
> > So I'm looking at my options and wondering if Linux is really the
> > solution.  I'm lucky in that I do have a good amount of resources on the
> > target hardware and it is PC based so I know OpenBSD will run.  I just
> > need it to be able to have some features that Linux does that will allow
> > me to do some of the things I need to do.  Like initrd, ramdisks, etc...
> > 
> 
> It is probably too soon to tell exactly what the GPL 3 will allow and
> disallow...  However, if you don't like v3 then don't use it.  The
> kernel is currently GPL 2 only, and that is very unlikely to change.
> Most software that isn't GPL 2 only has a line stating "or any future
> version of the GPL."  The word "or" is the important one.  You can still
> continue to use it under the GPL 2 if you desire.
> 
> > Anyway maybe its time to get off the "Sub $250 PCs" thread and talk
> > about something else.  Flame away.
> > 
> 
> You get what you pay for, right? :)
> 
> Pat
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale




More information about the Ale mailing list