[Arm-netbook] Mali-400 driver status

[lkcl luke]

2011/12/28 Henrik Nordström <henrik at henriknordstrom.net>:
> tis 2011-12-27 klockan 18:08 +0000 skrev lkcl luke:
>> 2011/12/27 Henrik Nordström <henrik at henriknordstrom.net>:
>> > tis 2011-12-27 klockan 00:34 +0000 skrev lkcl luke:
>> >
>> >> > I know GPU drivers can be a big problem.
>> >>
>> >>  yes.  fortunately, most of these qualify as "system libraries" and
>> >> are thus exempt under the GPL.
>> >
>> > Well, depends on who you ask.
>>
>>  richard stallman.
>
> Well, not really. Have you asked him on this?

 yes.  spent a considerable amount of both mine and his time, making
sure i explained things clearly to him.

> The "system libraries" exception in GPL is for allowing the use of GPL
> programs on non-free OS:es such as UNIX.

 it has a secondary (additional) purpose which isn't very clear, but
it is effectively the same thing.

 imagine that, instead of a completely non-free OS, that OS happens,
instead of entirely being comprised of non-free ("system") libraries,
is made up almost entirely of GNU libraries, with *one* exception: a
library which has, as its sole exclusive purpose, the role of
providing direct access to the 3D hardware on that system (in other
words, it's a "system" library).

 ... you see where this is going? :)

> It's not an exception allowing non-free parts in an free OS.

 according to richard, when i specifically discussed this with him (in
the context of PowerVR non-free libraries) he was very clear [much
clearer than the paragraph above].

> Any such
> combination is a non-free OS with all the complications in both
> licensing and ethical issues.

 richard was very clear.  these libraries have the sole exclusive
purpose of providing access to the hardware, and thus qualify as
"system libraries".

 i did not ask for a clarification of the difference, but i should
imagine that something such as... oh, i dunno... pick a trivial
example.... such as.... a proprietary implementation of the zlib
library.  or, perhaps better, a proprietary implementation of a
library that converts postscript into pdf.

 such a library (postscript to pdf converter) could hardly qualify as
being a "system library" - you don't *need* that library in order to
use the full capabilities of the hardware of that system, do you?

 thus, such a library would not even remotely qualify as being exempt.

 i appreciate that it's a borderline case, being strictly within the
licensing, but it's definitely borderline ethical case / contrary to
the spirit of "software libre".

 ...

 i tell you, i'll be really really glad when this is sorted, and
software libre libraries are available for all these SoC GPU engines.


>>  you'd have to read ARM's license for MALI in this case.
>
> Which I don't have as I do not own an ARM license.

 hurrah! good call :)

 l.