DRM radeon i2c support and GPL

Jon Smirl jonsmirl at gmail.com
Mon Sep 20 19:50:51 PDT 2004

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:10:31 +0100, Alan Cox <alan at lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> On Llu, 2004-09-20 at 18:38, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > Inclusion is not conversion, in this case.  All the copyright statements in
> > the DRM source (excluding your recent commit) specify BSD licenses.  If the
> > bug-fixers wanted their changes to apply under the GPL they should have
> > indicated that by changing the copyright statement at the top of the file.
> Some of the pure Linux code is clearly derivative of existing GPL code.
> I personally don't see the issue for platform specific code that isn't
> meant to be and won't be portable. Providing that code is also clearly
> marked. Is there a reason however for not starting from the X code for
> doing this management ?

I picked a very simple piece of code to start out with as a test case.
The I2C code is only a hundred lines and could be rewritten. But
what's the point, BSD doesn't have Linux's I2C driver system. This
code has no value anywhere but on Linux.

There are more complicated files that I am looking at. For example
sysfs support, it is much easier to just copy class_simple.c into the
project and start editing on it that it is to write it all over again.
GregKH even recommends doing this when you need a class that is more
complex than simple.

Jon Smirl
jonsmirl at gmail.com

More information about the xorg mailing list