Dear Jeroen,
In message 53E3EC54.4090002@myspectrum.nl you wrote:
So the argument about incompatible licenses is valid here. Should u-boot switch to GPLv3 you need to hunt down that file again and this
You would have to rewrite the major part of U-Boot or to cripple it
noise ^ not
to uselessness if you try to release it under GPLv3. I cannot see anybody investing any efforts in that direction; all these threads about a potential GPLv3 switch are just a hollow scarecrow.
sorry, can't parse that.
no, this was nicely formatted in my mail editor. Just wanted to point out you forgot a "not". You mentioned "to cripple it" you more then like ment "to _not_ cripple it". But the whitespace got lost along the way.
No, I did NOT forget a "not".
There is an awful lot of GPLv2 (V2 only) code in U-Boot. Many of the most interesting features thaty have been imported from the Linux kernel are GPLv2 only. Either you have to rewrite all this code. I don't see any volunteers for that in the community, and neither I see any commercial interest for that. So alternatively you would have to remove resp. disable in the configuration all such code - which would cripple U-Boot, as it would remove a lot of really useful functionali- ty, rendering it more or less useless for many practical use cases.
All people claiming "U-Boot will go GPLv3 tomorrow" are just spreading FUD.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk