[En-Nut-Discussion] Where are the devices gone...

Uwe Bonnes bon at elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de
Fri Oct 19 17:46:18 CEST 2012

>>>>> "uprinz" == uprinz  <ulrich.prinz at googlemail.com> writes:

    uprinz> I am sure that the EEPROM driver was written completely by me,
    uprinz> just copying code from my private repositories written by me
    uprinz> too. So there the license is not an issue.

Are you talking about the EEPROM driver? I don't see anything in the stm
directories. But all STM file at some point include stm32xxxx.h which
includes finaly the STM provided basic header. And these come with this
"Liberty" license. And something that needs so many lawyers words has few to
do with liberty. Harald decided to interprete the licence as non-BSD. And as
long as there are no BSD licences similar wordings, I think he is right.

    uprinz> With CortexM the use of the CMSIS is compatible with use under
    uprinz> BSD, so there is no need to check anything.

    uprinz> With STM32 the software staff from STM acknowledged the use of
    uprinz> their software under BSD if the first part of their header is
    uprinz> kept in the files.  So for files still in original STM format no
    uprinz> additional confirmation for licenses are needed.  The other
    uprinz> files in the STM32 library are either heavily rewritten by me or
    uprinz> completely rewritten by me so I think I can claim license
    uprinz> rights. And I declared them BSD.

    uprinz> So with STM32 no additional license options must be acknowledged
    uprinz> prior to have all devices available

Again, the basic headers.

But there is also a lot of cruft in /nut/arch/cm3/dev/stm. I will try to

Uwe Bonnes                bon at elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de

Institut fuer Kernphysik  Schlossgartenstrasse 9  64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

More information about the En-Nut-Discussion mailing list