LG violates gpl? take 2

[Luca Olivetti]

En/na Henrik Nordstrom ha escrit:
> lör 2010-03-27 klockan 09:46 +0100 skrev Luca Olivetti:
> 
...
>> b) it isn't compliant with the gpl
> 
> True, but only in a very strict sense.
> 
> There is a big difference here between unstructured development causing
> minor version mismatches and intentionally withholding requested
> information. I would not express slight version mismatch as
> non-compliance when dealing with vendors, but rather try to educate them
> on the importance of having a little structure in the development
> environment so the process can generate consistent builds and matching
> sources.

I'm not questioning LG's good-will in this, they've provided all sources 
so far (though they haven't provided all the information, e.g. on how to 
link the objects to a different uClibc), I'm questioning the process.

> non-compliance discussions because the sources are correct but mismatch
> by some limited amount of time from binary release is unfortunate and
> rarely productive.

OTOH you have to understand that I have to be extra careful with an 
expensive piece of equipment.
After all, it's the third version of the kernel sources that more or 
less matches the binary, and they maintained that all previous sources 
were the correct ones, so, again, I'm doubtful about the process.
How can I be sure that this one is really the correct one and won't fry 
my tv?
Ok I doubt that's the case, but still...

Bye
-- 
Luca