[coreboot] flashrom licensing

Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Wed Jun 24 16:22:51 CEST 2009

On 24.06.2009 15:54, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>> I wanted to add support for the TotalPhase Cheetah to flashrom, but
>> I have to use the proprietary driver library for that. I'm not
>> aware of any free alternative to that driver, so there may be a
>> conflict with the GPL.
> There would be no issue, if flasher drivers were not linked with
> flashrom, but rather separate processes implementing a well-defined
> interface.

Maybe. Each driver would have to be a separate process with no common
code or the same problem would just be moved to the common code of the

> Maybe you remember the discussion about flashrom plugins.

Sorry, I can't remember that discussion and a search turned up empty. If
you have a subject line or date, I'll gladly reread that discussion.

>> If the Cheetah driver library is considered to be a system library,
>> the GPL allows linking against that library.
> Cheetah is not essential for the system where flashrom is running so
> I do not think that can be argumented successfully.

True. Now if the Cheetah drivers were shipped by default on some Linux
distributions, they'd fit the FSF definition of system libraries. Oh well.

Anyway, since we have FT4232H flasher support, the Cheetah is
non-essential anyway.



More information about the coreboot mailing list