Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

GNU is Not Unix Open Source Hardware Linux

Checking For GPL Compliance, When the Code Is Embedded 75

Posted by timothy
from the thank-you-bruce-perens-for-busybox dept.
Excerpting from ComputerWorld UK, ChiefMonkeyGrinder writes with word of what sounds like a very cool tool: "Open source software is everywhere these days. In particular, Linux is being used increasingly to power embedded systems of all kinds. That's good, but it's also a challenge, because the free software used in such products may not always be compliant with all the licences it is released under, notably the GNU GPL. For companies that sell such embedded systems using open source, it can be hard even finding out what exactly is inside, let alone whether it is compliant. Enter the new Binary Analysis Tool."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Checking For GPL Compliance, When the Code Is Embedded

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Frist post (Score:2, Informative)

    by Dayofswords (1548243) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @07:52AM (#31880540)

    haha..... you didn't, right?

    There are bears out there!

  • Way to go .. (Score:2, Informative)

    by roguegramma (982660) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @08:45AM (#31880854) Journal

    Technical requirements

            * A Fedora GNU/Linux installation
            * python (2.6 or higher preferred, but not 3)
            * python-magic
            * GNU binutils (for readelf and strings)
            * e2tools [] (optional)
            * squashfs tools (4.0 highly recommended)
            * module-init-tools (for modinfo)
            * gzip (for zcat)
            * xz (for lzma)
            * PyLucene (latest version possible)
            * OpenJDK, Apache Ant and dependencies to build PyLucene

  • by DarkOx (621550) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @01:00PM (#31882418) Journal

    Its not hypocrisy at all but a cleaver response. The GPL was originally created because RMS felt that the way software was being produced, sold, and controlled with licensing, patents, and copyright was not good for people, the economy, and especially the general principle of freedom.

    He and others first lobbied to try and get the rules changed, many continue that effort. In the mean time he did the next best thing. He co-opted the rules and created a license that preserves things he felt were important that others were using the same rules to take away. He then put in lots of effort to ensure there would be a concentration of value protected by that license such that others would want to access it. The four freedoms would for the most part exist in the natural state; that is a world free of patents, and copyright. You might not always have the source to something you bought but it would be a pretty tough world to sell software in competitively without offering the code.
    So what the GPL is really designed to do is say, look we don't think the system should work this way and that there should be these rules but ok if you get to use them than so can we. If you don't like it than you have to adopt our position that the copyright and patent system at least where software is concerned is broken and throw out your rules.
    were using the same rules to take away. Most of the freedoms would probably exist

Is your job running? You'd better go catch it!