Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 06:38:53PM -0700, Jeff Carr wrote:
> Because that's how the hardware works. If you are making a widget and
> you need a fpga or hybrid chip of any sort, then you generate a binary
> blob using the chip manufacturers tools.
But you provide input to the tool, usually VHDL code or similar. That
would be the source, and you can provide that. That is the prefered
format for editing. We use plenty of FPGAs at work, and I have seen how
they are programmed, and yes I have seen what the source looks like. It
is certainly human readable source code. If you think otherwise, then
you don't know how FPGAs and CPLDs work.
The tool doesn't have a magic buttong labeled 'make the chip do what I
am thinking of now".
> So, no matter how good you intend on being, how much you love free
> software, you don't have any choice. Again, this is ironic since
> things like the opencores project are the most free hardware of all
> and are not given credit for it in this thread.
And opencores.org distributes source, not binary blobs. Gee whiz.