[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Major JFFS2 bug (?)
At 01:58 PM 6/26/2001 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > Keep me updated on that; they're not copyright holders of JFFS so
> > they cannot change the license.
> > Then again, it might just be a market-droid misunderstanding..
>Draw your own conclusion as you will from the following:
> bool 'BlueCat Linux Flash File System support' CONFIG_BLUECAT_FFS
> #ifdef CONFIG_BLUECAT_FFS
> #if 0
> printk("JFFS version " JFFS_VERSION_STRING ", (C) 1999,
> 2000 "
> "Axis Communications AB\n");
> return register_filesystem(&jffs_fs_type);
>$ rpm -qip ffs_trg-1.0-1.i386.rpm
>Name : ffs_trg Relocations: (not relocateable)
>Version : 1.0 Vendor: (none)
>Release : 1 Build Date: Wed 27 Sep 2000
>Install date: (not installed) Build Host: build2.tst
>Group : Applications/System Source RPM: ffs_trg-1.0-1.src.rpm
>Size : 651953 License: LynuxWorks
>Summary : BlueCat Linux Flash File System And MTD Drivers
>BlueCat Linux Flash File System provides a file system directly on Flash,
>rather than emulating a block device. FFS is intended to provide a
>crash/powerdown-safe file system for diskless embedded devices.
Apologies for the confusion surrounding LynuxWorks' inclusion of the JFFS
package. There really is no intention of changing the copyright or license
whatsoever. I think we've been a little untidy and possibly rude as you've
pointed out. The delimiter was merely a way of ensuring we could pull the
code in/out with ease. That license field in the RPM is just plain
wrong. With our next release we'll clean that up and look for other spots
where we've messed up so we can better communicate the correct
information. Please try to rest assured that none of the JFFS sources will
touch LynxOS either.
-- Dave Moore
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe jffs-dev" in
the body of a message to email@example.com