Re: [tlug] Buffalo GPL Compliance

[Edward Middleton <edward@example.com>]

Jim wrote:
> I was referring to Buffalo GPL issues in general. 
> When I saw the Buffalo name in Patrick's email, it jogged my 
> memory about GPL controversies involving some Buffalo outfit, 
> A little bit of searching confirmed that there was smoke, 
> so I posted to give others a head's up on what due diligence to 
> perform with Buffalo products. Hopefully all the controversies are 
> in the past.

If we are talking about the same controversy, my understanding (correct
me if I am wrong) was that a lot of low end wireless routers were using
a Broadcom chips, running a modified version of a commercial embedded
Linux distribution  (whos source was available in compliance with the
GPL).  Broadcom provided a modified kernel to $foo wireless router
company under an NDA without making clear they had made modifications. 
While this is clearly not a smart thing to do, my understanding was that
said $foo expedited permission to distribute the required modifications.

> I'm glad it does not seem to be an issue with 
> what Patrick acquired. 
>   

Does it work with a vanilla kernel or does it require binary drivers?

Edward