gnupic: PIC vs GPL question
Subject:
Re: PIC vs GPL question
From:
Byron A Jeff ####@####.####
Date:
4 Nov 2004 14:50:24 +0000
Message-Id: <20041104145020.GA13988@cleon.cc.gatech.edu>
On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 01:12:34PM +1300, David McNab wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm familiar with the requirements when using 3rd-party GPL software
> when developing programs for distribution - eg, thou shalt provide
> source code to the 3rd party GPL code, plus everything that links to it.
Good.
>
> But what's the situation if I'm using 3rd party GPL code in my PIC firmware?
"thou shalt provide source code to the 3rd party GPL code, plus everything
that links to it."
Which for firmware means the source for the entire project.
> If I market a PIC-based consumer applicance, and my firmware internally
> uses a 3rd-party GPL'ed library, does this mean that I have to enclose
> the full firmware source code, including my own code, in the appliance's
> packaging?
No. That's one option. You need to make the source available. It can be with
the product. Or on a website. Or even simply a written offer. Of course sending
with the machine satisfies all requirements, so it may be easier.
> If so, would it suffice to enclose a printed disassembly
> listing in the back pages of the appliance manual, or would I need to
> also enclose machine-readable media such as a CD?
Machine readable. And it must be the actual source.
GPL isn't the right tool for the job.
BAJ
