[openib-general] [ofw] [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: Re: win related [was: Re:[PATCH 1/2] opensm: sigusr1: syslog() fixes]]]

Hal Rosenstock halr at voltaire.com
Tue Feb 20 10:56:38 PST 2007 

On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 13:56, Fab Tillier wrote:
> Submissions to the OFW project are supposed to be bound by the
> contributor's agreement:
> 
> http://windows.openib.org/openib/contribute.aspx
> 
> Contributing code under anything but a BSD license violates condition 1,
> though there shouldn't be issues with dual licenses as long as one of
> the available licenses is a BSD license.
> 
> In any case, we're not talking about putting the pthreads library in
> source or binary form in the OFW SVN, right? 

Right (we're not).

>  We're just talking about
> having OpenSM link to the pthreads library that is out-of-tree.

Yes.

>   So the
> question is whether there are any licensing issues with having a BSD
> code include an out-of-tree LGPL file that would affect the ability to
> retain the BSD license on the OpenSM files.

I don't think this is an issue as there are other instances of this
being done (outside of OpenIB).

> I can see this causing
> problems for builds, as people would need to find/install the pthreads
> library before OpenSM would build successfully.

Could install documentation for OpenSM on Windows minimize this as an
issue ?

-- Hal

> -Fab
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org
> [mailto:ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Hal Rosenstock
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 10:38 AM
> To: ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> Cc: Gilad Shainer; OPENIB
> Subject: [ofw] [Fwd: Re: [openib-general] [Fwd: Re: win related [was:
> Re:[PATCH 1/2] opensm: sigusr1: syslog() fixes]]]
> 
> Also, looping in the OpenFabrics Windows email list on this.
> 
> -- Hal
> 
> -----Forwarded Message-----
> 
> From: Hal Rosenstock <halr at voltaire.com>
> To: Tzachi Dar <tzachid at mellanox.co.il>
> Cc: OPENIB <openib-general at openib.org>, Gilad Shainer
> <Shainer at Mellanox.com>
> Subject: Re: [openib-general] [Fwd: Re: win related [was: Re: [PATCH
> 1/2] opensm: sigusr1: syslog() fixes]]
> Date: 20 Feb 2007 13:21:38 -0500
> 
> Hi Tzachi,
> 
> On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 16:24, Tzachi Dar wrote:
> > See bellow.
> 
> I would like to get back to trying to close on this discussion.
> 
> > Thanks
> > Tzachi 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sasha Khapyorsky [mailto:sashak at voltaire.com] 
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 9:47 PM
> > > To: Tzachi Dar
> > > Cc: Yossi Leybovich; Gilad Shainer; Yevgeny Kliteynik; 
> > > OPENIB; Michael S. Tsirkin; Hal Rosenstock
> > > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: win related [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] 
> > > opensm: sigusr1: syslog() fixes]]
> > > 
> > > On 20:31 Thu 08 Feb     , Tzachi Dar wrote:
> > > > The windows open IB has decided on using a BSD only license. 
> > > > The common implementation of pthreads as far as I know is 
> > > LGPL, which 
> > > > means that it can not be used in open IB.
> > > 
> > > Why not? AFAIK it works perfectly (see (5,6 and Preamble)):
> > > http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html
> > > 
> > > And of course there are tons of examples when BSD software 
> > > links against LGPLed glibc.
> > 
> > I can of course write you an answer that will be more than 5 pages
> long
> > of why *I* don't think that 
> > Using GPL software is bad for everyone, but I guess that my opinion
> > doesn't really meter, so I
> > Won't do it.
> > The page that you have referenced is of the GNU org, and even there it
> > is hard to say that they
> > are trying to encourage you to use the LGPL license. In any case, the
> > main point is that 
> > When open IB windows was formed there was a general decision that it
> > will use BSD license. If we
> > Start having components with the LGPL this will break that decision,
> and
> > therefore this requires
> > some voting of the open IB organization.
> 
> I may be missing your point but is there something in the Windows
> OpenIB/OpenFabrics license that precludes using Windows OpenIB licensed
> code (e.g. BSD like license) in concert with non OpenIB code (like LGPL)
> ? Isn't that essentially what using the Windows pthreads DLL with OpenSM
> would be like ? As I understand it, I don't think this requires a
> license change or anything in the OpenIB Windows charter prevents this
> or needs changing.
> 
> > > > The only two ways that I see around this are 1) Change the 
> > > license of 
> > > > open IB windows which might be a complicated thing. 2) Find an 
> > > > implementation of pthreads that is BSD.
> > > 
> > > BTW, just wondering... What is relation between windows open 
> > > IB and OFA (and OFA's "dual-license rule")?
> > Well, the way I see it one can take code from the Linux part under the
> > BSD licance and use it in 
> > The windows part. The otherway around seems fine to me but some say
> that
> > since the windows BSD liscance
> > Reqires that some text will always remain there, the other way around
> is
> > not possibale. As I'm not an 
> > Expert in that erea I don't know who is right.
> 
> I don't see how this affects what is being discussed about OpenSM. In
> all the cases I'm aware of, the portability is from Linux to Windows and
> not the other way around.
> 
> -- Hal
> 
> > > Sasha
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Tzachi
> > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Sasha Khapyorsky [mailto:sashak at voltaire.com]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 7:46 PM
> > > > > To: Tzachi Dar; Yossi Leybovich
> > > > > Cc: Yevgeny Kliteynik; OPENIB; Michael S. Tsirkin; Hal
> Rosenstock
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: win related [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2]
> > > > > opensm: sigusr1: syslog() fixes]]
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 11:24 Sun 21 Jan     , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
> > > > > > Tzachi, Yossi, please join the thread.
> > > > > > What do you think about distributing a copy of the pthread DLL
> 
> > > > > > with opensm?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Any news here? Thanks.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Sasha
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -- Yevgeny.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > > > Subject: Re: win related [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] opensm:
> sigusr1: 
> > > > > > syslog() fixes]
> > > > > > Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 00:20:32 +0200
> > > > > > From: Sasha Khapyorsky <sashak at voltaire.com>
> > > > > > To: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at mellanox.co.il>
> > > > > > CC: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn at dev.mellanox.co.il>,        
> > > > > OPENIB <openib-general at openib.org>
> > > > > > References: <20070118194403.GA23783 at sashak.voltaire.com>
> > > > > > <20070118215023.GP9890 at mellanox.co.il>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On 23:50 Thu 18 Jan     , Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > > > Quoting Sasha Khapyorsky <sashak at voltaire.com>:
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: win related [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] 
> > > opensm: sigusr1: 
> > > > > > > > syslog() fixes]
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > On 07:00 Thu 18 Jan     , Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > What about pure opensource - 
> > > > > > > > > > http://sourceware.org/pthreads-win32/? It is licensed 
> > > > > > > > > > under LGPL, I see on the net many positive reports
> about
> > > > > stability and usability.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > I used it to do a windows port of linux complib at some 
> > > > > > > > > point and opensm seemed to work fine with it. What it
> was
> > > > > lacking at
> > > > > > > > > that point was support for 64 bit applications, 
> > > and for some 
> > > > > > > > > reason (which is still unclear to me) there was a
> > > > > strong desire to run opensm in 64 bit mode.
> > > > > > > > > Seems to have been fixed now, BTW.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > So this seems to be good option for OpenSM on 
> > > Windows. Right?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > No idea. Distributing a copy of the pthread DLL with
> > > > > opensm does not
> > > > > > > look like a problem. But is it worth it?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Sure, it makes windows porting much more transparent and
> > > > > let us to use
> > > > > > standard *nix stuff w/out #ifndef WIN32. Other 
> > > (generic) benefit 
> > > > > > is that posix is more standard and powerful than 
> > > wrappers like complib.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Sasha
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openib-general mailing list
> openib-general at openib.org
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> 
> To unsubscribe, please visit
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ofw mailing list
> ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw

More information about the general mailing list