[SeaBIOS] [PATCH please reply] make acpi bits GPLv2 compatible

[Laszlo Ersek]

On 03/20/13 16:57, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> You are getting this mail because you might have contributed code to one
> of the files in seabios that we want to reuse in QEMU,
> when this file was under GPLv3 or LGPLv3.
> 
> QEMU is GPLv2 at the moment, so as a step in the process of moving acpi
> tables to qemu, we need to make sure the code we'll be moving is GPLv2
> compatible.
> 
> The code was originally LGPLv2 in bochs so these bits are OK.
> 
> QEMU generally prefers GPLv2 or later, so this is what this
> patch does. The plan is therefore:
> - collect acks from everyone
> - copy code to QEMU and apply this patch to QEMU copy only
> 
> If you allow the use of your contribution in QEMU under the
> terms of GPLv2 or later as proposed by this patch,
> please respond to this mail including the line:
> 
> Acked-by: Name <email address>
> 
> in the message body.
> 
> For example:
> Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>

 src/acpi-dsdt-cpu-hotplug.dsl    |   15 +++++++++++++++
 src/acpi-dsdt-dbug.dsl           |   15 +++++++++++++++
 src/acpi-dsdt-hpet.dsl           |   15 +++++++++++++++
 src/acpi-dsdt-isa.dsl            |   15 +++++++++++++++
 src/acpi-dsdt-pci-crs.dsl        |   15 +++++++++++++++
 src/acpi.c                       |   14 +++++++++++++-
 src/acpi.h                       |   14 ++++++++++++++
 src/ssdt-misc.dsl                |   15 +++++++++++++++
 src/ssdt-pcihp.dsl               |   15 +++++++++++++++
 src/ssdt-proc.dsl                |   15 +++++++++++++++
 tools/acpi_extract.py            |   13 ++++++++++++-
 tools/acpi_extract_preprocess.py |   13 ++++++++++++-
 12 files changed, 171 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Just a note: for my recent series to qemu-devel
<http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-03/msg03575.html>,
I didn't copy code from seabios to qemu (file-wise, clipboard-wise,
hand-eye-coordination-wise, or otherwise). For me "read, understand,
write new code" seems to work best.

(I obviously *did* consult (= read) src/acpi.* (hence the patch for
build_madt() too). That activity probably didn't require this patch (=
the permissions of the copyright holders), but I agree that the patch
builds a safer ground even for "my approach".)

Laszlo