Licensing Question

[Alexander Amelkin]

09.08.2018 19:41, Patrick Venture wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 9:32 AM, Vernon Mauery
> <vernon.mauery at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> On 08-Aug-2018 03:45 PM, Patrick Venture wrote:
>>> So, I've spent the last hour trying to submodule my way to using
>>> ipmitool.  I've managed to get it compiling for just the one file I
>>
>> Okay, I'll bite. What are you trying to use ipmitool for?
> I'm trying to use the ipmitool source for speaking IPMI without
> duplicating the code to do so.  I can just open the file interface
> myself and handle it, but it seemed to reinvent the wheel on this one.
> Although I do need to push a bugfix to ipmitool where they don't check
> the msgId returned to see if it matches their expectation.  Unless
> someone else fixed it (still need to check).
There are other options, you know. You could use libopenipmi or
libfreeipmi libraries if you're trying to talk IPMI from a C++ code.
ipmitool is only good for scripts.
>> I think Alexander is working on getting ipmitool to compile without warnings
>> upstream. That is quite the task though; he inherited a lot of warnings. :)
I do. And it's really hell of a task. I've inherited not just a lot of
warnings, but also a lot of magic numbers, copy-pasted or plain
inefficient or useless code, etc. A good example of how broken things
live for decades and even soak into parallel products is
https://github.com/ipmitool/ipmitool/issues/25
>>
>>> So, I can keep battling this, or I can ask -- the license for the
>>> ipmitool just says I need to keep a copy of the license with the
>>> source if I reuse it.  So, I can do that, and I can hack it up to work
>>> -- but where I'm curious is -- how does that impact the license of
>>> phosphor-ipmi-flash?
What exactly are you trying to do? Create your own flavor of ipmitool
with blackjack and... bugfixes? Better submit pull requests to upstream
then.

If you're trying to just borrow some portions of code, then... Well, you
can do it as long as you keep the BSD license boilerplate with
respective copyright info, but I'm feeling like it's not a good idea
anyway.
> The license is fairly permissive, just says I need to include it.
Yup. It's just a standard BSD three-clause license.

Alexander.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/attachments/20180813/bc653aab/attachment-0001.sig>