Date: Tue, 21 Mar 1995 16:40:25 +0100 (MET) From: Marino.Ladavac@aut.alcatel.at (Marino Ladavac) To: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) Cc: hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Adaptec sequencer code (was: SVNET Meeting) Message-ID: <9503211541.AA07308@aut.alcatel.at> In-Reply-To: <9503210004.AA03603@cs.weber.edu> from "Terry Lambert" at Mar 20, 95 05:04:10 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: > > For the purposes of binary distribution, it ought to be easier to > either get the sequencer code un-GPL'ed, rewrite it, or someone sign > a non-disclosure with Adaptec and write a binary driver distributed > soley as .o files. > > 8-|. > Since the sequencer code is, as far as I could understand, just a bunch of raw binary data, is it not itself basically unreadable (bar disassembly) and as such non disclosing? I mean, knowing how they did program the sequencer is nice, but do we really care that much, as long as it works? I don't know about Adaptec's opinion on distributing only the object format of the sequencer. Is that kosher? /Alby
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9503211541.AA07308>