Implement "fastboot flash" for eMMC

- to prepare for the support of fastboot sparse images

Signed-off-by Steve Rae <[email protected]>

---

Quoted 4 lines · Steve Rae

- to prepare for the support of fastboot sparse images

Signed-off-by Steve Rae <[email protected]>

---

Are we discussing the licensing issues here still ? Tom ?

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Quoted 6 lines · Marek Vasut

Quoted 4 lines · Steve Rae

- to prepare for the support of fastboot sparse images

Signed-off-by Steve Rae <[email protected]>

---

Quoted 4 lines

Are we discussing the licensing issues here still ? Tom ?

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

I hope so -- and I'm hoping that someone can help resolve this!!!! Thanks in advance, Steve

Are we discussing the licensing issues here still ? Tom ?

Dear Marek,

Quoted 1 line · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:

Are we discussing the licensing issues here still ? Tom ?

Well, of course? We cannot add code that comes under an incompatible license. And we use SPDX ids.

- to prepare for the support of fastboot sparse images

Signed-off-by Steve Rae <[email protected]>

---
This file is ASIS from:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AOSB/android_system_core/master/libsparse/sparse_format.h
(commit 28fa5bc347390480fe190294c6c385b6a9f0d68b)
except for the __UBOOT__ conditional include.

+ * Copyright (C) 2010 The Android Open Source Project
+ *
+ * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+ * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+ * You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *

+ * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */

Dear Steve Rae,

Quoted 10 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:

- to prepare for the support of fastboot sparse images

Signed-off-by Steve Rae <[email protected]>

---

This file is ASIS from:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AOSB/android_system_core/master/libsp
arse/sparse_format.h (commit 28fa5bc347390480fe190294c6c385b6a9f0d68b)

except for the __UBOOT__ conditional include.

Please make sure this origin documentation becomes part of the commit message - here in the comment section it gets lost. Please fix for all your patches.

Quoted 6 lines

+ * Copyright (C) 2010 The Android Open Source Project
+ *
+ * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+ * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+ * You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *

Quoted 8 lines

+ * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and + * limitations under the License.
+ */

Please always use SPDX license tags only.

Please note that this license is not compatible with GPL version 2, because it has some requirements that are not in that GPL version. An U-Boot is covered by GPLv2 ...

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 3 lines

+ * Copyright (C) 2010 The Android Open Source Project
+ *
+ * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");

Please note that this license is not compatible with GPL version 2, because it has some requirements that are not in that GPL version. An U-Boot is covered by GPLv2 ...

I think we should start considering getting some kind of a legal conseling here, or do we actually have one already ?

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Quoted 10 lines · Marek Vasut

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines

+ * Copyright (C) 2010 The Android Open Source Project
+ *
+ * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");

Please note that this license is not compatible with GPL version 2, because it has some requirements that are not in that GPL version. An U-Boot is covered by GPLv2 ...

I think we should start considering getting some kind of a legal conseling here, or do we actually have one already ?

I used the gnu page back then. Apache2 is compatible with GPLv3 but not with GPLv2 [0]. Some parts of the code I played around (the android image header file for instance) was under the Apache2 license and in another git tree under the two-clause BSD license which was compatible with GPLv2 [1].
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 time with the apache2 license :)

I agree. Is there a version of this file with BSD license on it ? Then that'd be a problem solved, right ?

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Quoted 2 lines · Marek Vasut

I agree. Is there a version of this file with BSD license on it ? Then that'd be a problem solved, right ?

Right. I don't recall the locations of the second tree but if Steve is going to search it, he should find it.

Quoted 2 lines · Marek Vasut

I agree. Is there a version of this file with BSD license on it ? Then that'd be a problem solved, right ?

Right. I don't recall the locations of the second tree but if Steve is going to search it, he should find it.

Quoted 5 lines

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Sebastian

Quoted 3 lines

I think we should start considering getting some kind of a legal conseling here, or do we actually have one already ?

I used the gnu page back then. Apache2 is compatible with GPLv3 but not with GPLv2 [0]. Some parts of the code I played around (the android image header file for instance) was under the Apache2 license and in another git tree under the two-clause BSD license which was compatible with GPLv2 [1].

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

<snip>

Quoted 2 lines

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

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.

It seems clear to me that GPLv3 is not an acceptable solution for developers, vendors, and end users simultanously. When I ask for GPLv2+ I hope that some later version of GPL may find better general support.

Quoted 4 lines · Wolfgang Denk

<snip>

Quoted 2 lines

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

Quoted 3 lines

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.

Dear Jeroen,

Quoted 2 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:

Quoted 1 line · Wolfgang Denk

<snip>

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 2 lines

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

Quoted 3 lines

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.

Quoted 9 lines · Wolfgang Denk

Dear Jeroen,

Quoted 6 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:

Quoted 4 lines · Wolfgang Denk

<snip>

Quoted 2 lines

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

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 3 lines

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.

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 3 lines

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

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 3 lines

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.

Dear Jeroen,

Quoted 14 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:

Quoted 13 lines

Quoted 11 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

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

Quoted 3 lines

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.

Quoted 3 lines

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.

OK, so we need a GPLv2-compatible header file. That's the conclusion.

Dear Marek,

Quoted 1 line · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:

OK, so we need a GPLv2-compatible header file. That's the conclusion.

Well, GPLv2 compatible might be acceptable, but GPLv2+ compatible woould be best.

Quoted 7 lines · Wolfgang Denk

Dear Marek,

Quoted 1 line · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:

OK, so we need a GPLv2-compatible header file. That's the conclusion.

Well, GPLv2 compatible might be acceptable, but GPLv2+ compatible woould be best.

I was talking to Hans about this yesterday (and who was dropped from the CC for some reason) and it turns out the easy way out here is to just reimplement the header. I would like him to take a look and express his opinion properly though.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

( Google agreed to submit a patch with BSD3 license.... stay tuned!!! )

Quoted 17 lines · Wolfgang Denk

Dear Jeroen,

Quoted 13 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:

Quoted 6 lines · Wolfgang Denk

<snip>

Quoted 2 lines

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

Quoted 3 lines

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.

Quoted 1 line

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.

This series implements the "fastboot flash" command for eMMC devices. It supports both raw and sparse images.

NOTES:
- the support for the "fastboot flash" command is enabled with CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH - the support for eMMC is enabled with CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV - (future) the support for NAND would be enabled with CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_NAND(???)

This has been tested on ARMv7.

Quoted 9 lines · Steve Rae

This series implements the "fastboot flash" command for eMMC devices. It supports both raw and sparse images.

NOTES:
- the support for the "fastboot flash" command is enabled with CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH - the support for eMMC is enabled with CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV - (future) the support for NAND would be enabled with CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_NAND(???)

Quoted 1 line

This has been tested on ARMv7.

I'll just wait for Tom's comments on 4/5 and 5/5 and will see then. The 1-3/5 look OK.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut