[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] update config.guess & config.sub
florian at openwrt.org
Mon Nov 2 14:46:27 EST 2015
On 02/11/15 11:01, Kathy Giori wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Alexey Brodkin
> <Alexey.Brodkin at synopsys.com> wrote:
>> Hi Felix,
>> On Thu, 2015-07-30 at 11:43 +0300, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
>>> These are from today's master branch of:
>>> In particular it adds support for ARC architecture plus some more
>>> improvements and fixes.
>>> This patch is built-tested against NetGear WNDR3800.
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin at synopsys.com>
>>> Cc: Florian Fainelli <florian at openwrt.org>
>>> Cc: Imre Kaloz <kaloz at openwrt.org>
>>> scripts/config.guess | 378 +++++++++++++++++++--------------------------------
>>> scripts/config.sub | 150 ++++++++++++--------
>>> 2 files changed, 238 insertions(+), 290 deletions(-)
>> I'm wondering if there're any comments on this one.
>> Otherwise please consider applying.
>> This patch is a prerequisite for ARC port submission I'm going to send out
> Is there a particular reason that this architecture must be submitted
> to OpenWrt under the terms GPL v3+? I would prefer that OpenWrt stick
> to GPL v2 in order to maintain better compatibility with the Linux
> kernel (kernel.org). The kernel is primarily GPL v2 licensed (or
> something FreeBSD-like which is more, not less, permissive). The
> OpenWrt distro has only a few GPL v3 package exceptions, such as
This is a quick jump to invalid conclusions, the changes that Alexey is
submitting are to files under scripts/* which are only used during the
build process in this case, and there are no GPLv3 components being
included in the firmware image per-se.
These specific files are used by autotools and friends to detect the
architecture/machine we cross-compile for, and as such as a prerequisite
for supporting an ARC toolchain.
As such, the changes are completely fine, and have no bearing to the
resulting firmware image.
> The OpenWrt core team are doing a good job building a better
> industry-community relationship for OpenWrt, which I think can be a
> win-win for overall project improvement (brings in more developer
> resources, much like kernel development depends on industry
> developers). Introducing more GPL v3 packages makes it problematic for
> certain industry partners to be able to fully collaborate.
Although I do share the same feeling, I think the justification is way
off, GPLv3 does not prevent anybody from contributing, it may just hurt
your distribution model, which is something entirely different.
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
More information about the openwrt-devel