Re: broadcom proposed firmware licence, please comment ...
Andres Salomon wrote:
> As I remember, upstream (jgarzik/davem) was not overly interested in such
> a patch to tg3. Is this still the case, or are they amenable to such
Upstream was not interested in legal niceties like including copyright
statements, either. I suppose both are still the case.
I think they said they'd accept a patch which loaded the firmware but fell
back to firmware built into the kernel if it wasn't present, as a
"transitional" requirement. Ugh squared. But I can do it; I can even do
it in such a way that the tg3 patch to the kernel would consist of a single
> I'd rather not maintain a tg3 patch again, if possible.
I understand. :-(
This space intentionally left blank.