Subject: Re: wpi port -- Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG chipset.
To: None <tech-kern@netbsd.org>
From: Christos Zoulas <christos@astron.com>
List: tech-kern
Date: 06/06/2006 00:15:43
In article <19366.1149547772@splode.eterna.com.au>,
matthew green <mrg@eterna.com.au> 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 [0].
>
>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@.
>
>yeah.
>
>[0]: 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.
christos