Subject: Re: wpi port -- Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG chipset.
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/06/2006 00:15:43
In article <email@example.com>,
matthew green <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Another idea would be to include the ucode in base. It seems that ath
> microcode has a similar license and we have it in base .
>the license seems 3-clause UCB-alike to me. what do others think?
>i think we could just put it in base.
> Maybe this issue should be directed to board@ or core@.
>: I've been told that by including it in CVS would be considered a
> modification. If this is true, we could make the binary file a C
> array, include that file in the CVS tree and then build the original
> binary file that way. IANAL.
>how does putting it CVS modify it? i don't buy this at all.
I don't buy this either. It looks like any other firmware from intel.