[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gNewSense-users] firmware in cx88-blackbird.c

From: Karl Goetz
Subject: Re: [gNewSense-users] firmware in cx88-blackbird.c
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 22:53:46 +0930

On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 09:58 +0200, Carsten Agger wrote:
> Karl Goetz <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >


> If this is the preferred form of modification, then it *must* be argued that 
> it is free; if there´s no hidden source code, then the hex data *is* the 
> source code in and of itself, and then the software is free if the file is 
> under a free license.

This is probably true - i tend to think of 'prefered form of
modification' (workding ok?) as something understandable

> That would be nice, but this is more a question about coding practises: Yes, 
> writing code so that it´s clear and easy to read, and keeping it well 
> documented, is a good coding practise which I myself strive to follow. It 
> does not, however, have anything to do with the question of whether the code 
> is free/non-free.
> Otherwise, I know of a great number of Perl scripts which would also have to 
> be marked as non-free because they contain so convoluted one-liners and 
> regular expressions that they can probably only ever be understood by the 
> author.

point well made.

> What matters is ultimately not whether data is hexadecimal or not, but whether
> a) you´re free to use, modify, share and improve it and
> b) it "hides" some source code which was used to generate it
> if ( a and not b) -> the software is free, and this would be true even if it 
> was all hexadecimal.

Your right of course, thanks for clarifying it.

> br
> Carsten
> --
> _______________________________________________
> gNewSense-users mailing list
> address@hidden
Karl Goetz,
Debian user / Ubuntu contributor / gNewSense contributor

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]