hald/linux/acpi.[ch] dual-license?

[Phi Tran]

Danny,

Have you had a chance to decide on this?

Phi

David Zeuthen wrote:
> Danny - mind replying to this request? Thanks!
> 
>     David
> 
> On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 16:46 -0700, Phi Tran wrote:
> 
>>Ok, it would help if I sent it to the HAL lists also.
>>
>>Phi Tran wrote:
>>
>>>Danny,
>>>
>>>I'm forwarding this email to you on the HAL list since this is a related
>>>HAL issue and would like your help.  Also, you seem more active on the
>>>list :)  Please take a look at the issue below which Richard and David
>>>have given permission.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>Phi
>>>
>>>
>>>Artem Kachitchkine wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Richard, David, Danny,
>>>>
>>>>We're in the process of adding ACPI/battery support to the Solaris HAL 
>>>>backend, and found that borrowing code from acpi.c could give us the 
>>>>most consistent behavior with Linux. Two key differences:
>>>>
>>>>1) we get info from the driver, not /proc, i.e. 
>>>>hal_util_set_*_elem_from_file() become ioctl();
>>>>2) we do this in addon, not hald, i.e. hal_*() become libhal_*();
>>>>
>>>>But assuming the underlying hardware is the same, those little bits of 
>>>>your experience with ACPI "peculiarities" on various systems 
>>>>incorporated in acpi.c could be useful to us.
>>>>
>>>>The problem is that acpi.[ch] are under GPL, as opposed to common HAL 
>>>>code which is GPL+AFL. Our addon-acpi is under AFL, so we cannot link 
>>>>them together. I wonder if it would be possible to also dual-license 
>>>>these two files?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>-Artem.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>hal mailing list
>>hal at lists.freedesktop.org
>>http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/hal
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> hal mailing list
> hal at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/hal