Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linksys Releases GPLed Code for WRT54G

Posted by michael on from the happy-thoughts dept.

petree writes "I stumbled across this on the Linksys website. Linksys has apparently caved to community pressure and released the GPLed source for linux running on their WRT54G. Cool Beans!"

11 of 335 comments (clear)

  1. Nice, but not a ton of info from it. by draziw · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's nice that you can see the GPL bits running on their box (Hey running a 2.4.5 kernel) - but it doesn't give you drivers, or scripts, etc. :(

    No I don't think they need to provide the other bits, but it sure would be nice to get some 802.11 drivers, etc.

    --
    +1 Karma bonus due to GPL Love & Low User ID.

  2. Does this mean we can work on the firmware? by fishynet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Can the OSS community now modify the firmware and make custom things for it?

    --

    Cats: All your base are belong to us.
    Captain: Take off every sig !!
  3. New linux toy? Oh yeah by petree · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now that all of this has been released, I wonder if we will be seeing alternative firmwares with support for new features (detailed external logging, radius server, wireless VLANs like the cisco APs, traffic shaping, oh, and MeshAP could be cool too.) A friend of mine already bought his WRT54G and likes it, but after I found this out (and submitted the story to slashdot) I ordered mine from Amazon($130 with free shipping) along with the NetGear WAG511($85 - 802.11a, 802.11g, 802.11b) as recommended by a Toms Hardware review. I'm so excited that I am going to have a dope 54mbps wireless network in my dorm room for only $215. A little excessive, maybe, but hey I will probably keep this for another 5+ yrs. Especially the 802.11a 802.11g cardbus card. Oh hey, if you are shopping, check out the SeattleWireless Hardware Comparison. They have all sorts of info there and it made it easier to decide what to buy.

  4. What about the BEFW11S4? by SirDrinksAlot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Isnt the BEFW11S4 in the same boat as the WRT54G? Isnt it based on linux as well?

  5. Re:A wireless network. For a dorm room. by Pirogoeth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Excessive perhaps, for just the room, but if their dorm is anything like mine was with a den down the hall or a study room in the basement or grassy areas out in front, a wireless connection like this would be pretty sweet.

    --
    Happiness is like peeing yourself. Everybody can see it but only you can feel its warmth.
  6. Still in violation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Vixie cron isn't a pure gpl license as you can read from their own source in the README file:

    #/* Copyright 1988,1990,1993 by Paul Vixie
    # * All rights reserved
    # *
    # * Distribute freely, except: don't remove my name from the source or
    # * documentation (don't take credit for my work), mark your changes (don't
    # * get me blamed for your possible bugs), don't alter or remove this
    # * notice. May be sold if buildable source is provided to buyer. No
    # * warrantee of any kind, express or implied, is included with this
    # * software; use at your own risk, responsibility for damages (if any) to
    # * anyone resulting from the use of this software rests entirely with the
    # * user.
    # *
    # * Send bug reports, bug fixes, enhancements, requests, flames, etc., and
    # * I'll try to keep a version up to date. I can be reached as follows:
    # * Paul Vixie uunet!decwrl!vixie!paul
    # */

    And so it looks like until linksys gives credit properly in the documentation to Paul Vixie they are still in violation of licensing agreements.

  7. Some of the released code isn't GPL... by diamond0 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I see vixie-cron in there, which isn't GPL. Paul Vixie, a former student at Berkeley, uses the BSD license last I knew.

    (He's better known for BIND, MAPS, PAIX, MFNX, etc.)

    --

    --
    There is no hatred more pure and true than that expressed by children.
  8. Okay, so now what? by jforman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have this actual piece of equipment, the WRT54G. Now that I've got this code, what do I do now? I am still unable (as far as i know) to edit this code, and safely reflash my router so i can run snmp off of it, or run snort/acid/etc.

    Great, GPL the code. But now make it useful for me.

  9. What linksys didnt release is... by jonwil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The code to whatever custom build of GCC was used to compile the things in the first place...

  10. Caved in due to "Community Pressure" by svachi · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Maybe it's just me, but after reading the term, I visioned a "community" mob treatening to burn Linksys's complex to the ground, Linksys gave in, the mob get what they want, and Linksys swear they won't do anything with the community again.

    IMHO, Linksys just honors the license of the software they used. Maybe they just strayed a bit, but it's not like they are actively trying to violate it. Why don't we put a better positive word to the situation? It will make the "community" sound like a more pleasant entity to interact with when we don't go pressuring people for what we want.

    --
    --- (The signature is intentionally left blank)
  11. Actual text of GPL by penguinrenegade · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is how you can get away with releasing only the ORIGINAL code, and not the Linksys mods.

    Quote:
    The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another language.

    Think about it. They distributed the source for the "Program" as outlined above. "A work based on the Program" can refer to either the Program (the original) or the "work based on the program" - that is, the derivative. So, if you take it to always mean "The Program" or the ORIGINAL program - then you only must distribute the ORIGINAL PROGRAM and not the mods! Perfectly within the GPL.

    I'll get modded down on this, but HONESTLY the GPL says this. It does not say that "The Program" means BOTH, but EITHER.

    The GPL doesn't say you have to release your mods, but only a list of the changes and what dates. Have you actually read the GPL?

    The other problem with the GPL is that there is conjecture and opinion throughout, not fact, as there must be in an Agreement. IANAL but I worked in the world of Contracting (as in Construction) and you must specify everything, not give opinion.

    "If you develop a new program, and you want it to be of the greatest possible use to the public, the best way to achieve this is to make it free software which everyone can redistribute and change under these terms."

    This is an OPINION that "the best way to achieve this." Sometimes making it of the greatest possible use to the public is to never use it. For instance, the software that drives nuclear missles. This is a deterrent. The best way to use this technology MIGHT be not to use it, not make it software which everyone can redistribute.

    The first time the GPL gets tried in court it will get thrown out because it's full of opinion, and holes like I just pointed out. And remember, I'm FOR Open Source. I just think that Richard Stallman tried to force his opinions on everyone else's work. "Free" my butt. (And I know the difference between free as in beer, etc.) Here's a quote from the FSF website:

    "The $5000 Deluxe Distribution includes all GNU software compiled for your choice of computing platform (micro-chip and operating system). Please contact the FSF Office if you are interested."

    "Free" my butt. $5000 US is a LOT of money for a program, period, ESPECIALLY for one user.

    Go Linksys. MAKE money. PROVIDE a valuable service!