Help wanted on porting a wifi library from Linux to FreeBSD

In message <CA+AExUT4fM+p85Shzp1xFFOrabS_FDwWYSbUJjmka6+***@mail.gmail.c
om>

Post by Artem Hevorhian
https://github.com/bmegli/wifi-scan
Here it is. It uses nl80211.h header. I think we should do the same on
FreeBSD. Mentorship is required for me to work on it. Please help me with
this.

Porting GPL code to FreeBSD is not a good idea. A rewrite under a BSD
license would work though.
--
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <***@cschubert.com>
FreeBSD UNIX: <***@FreeBSD.org> Web: https://FreeBSD.org
NTP: <***@nwtime.org> Web: https://nwtime.org

e^(i*pi)+1=0

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

Jason Bacon

2024-10-20 20:46:02 UTC

Porting GPL code to FreeBSD is not a good idea. A rewrite under a BSD
license would work though.

Porting GPL code into the FreeBSD base is undesirable, but is there any
reason this could not reside in ports?

--
Life is a game. Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

Warner Losh

2024-10-20 20:59:35 UTC

Post by Jason Bacon

Post by Cy Schubert
In message
om>

with

Post by Artem Hevorhian
this.

Porting GPL code to FreeBSD is not a good idea. A rewrite under a BSD
license would work though.

Porting GPL code into the FreeBSD base is undesirable, but is there any
reason this could not reside in ports?

Ports are fine as GPL

Warner

Post by Jason Bacon
Life is a game. Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.

Jason Bacon

2024-10-20 22:34:53 UTC

Post by Cy Schubert
In message
om>

https://github.com/bmegli/wifi-scan <https://github.com/bmegli/

wifi-scan>

Here it is. It uses nl80211.h header. I think we should do the

same on

FreeBSD. Mentorship is required for me to work on it. Please

help me with

this.

Porting GPL code to FreeBSD is not a good idea. A rewrite under a BSD
license would work though.

Porting GPL code into the FreeBSD base is undesirable, but is there any
reason this could not reside in ports?
Ports are fine as GPL

Right, but the question was would wifi-scan work well as a port vs part
of base.

--
Life is a game. Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
��םj�h��"q�eɼ��w��{�jٮqמ

Artem Hevorhian

2024-10-23 05:28:35 UTC

Let me rephrase.

I would like to modernize the wifi stack so that ioctls are not used
anymore in ifconfig scan operation, for example. I would like to use
netlink instead.

Post by Tomoaki AOKI
On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 17:17:25 -0700

Post by Cy Schubert
Tomoaki

On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 12:41:05 -0700

Post by Cy Schubert
In message

Post by Artem Hevorhian
https://github.com/bmegli/wifi-scan
Here it is. It uses nl80211.h header. I think we should do the

same on

Post by Artem Hevorhian
FreeBSD. Mentorship is required for me to work on it. Please help

me with

Post by Artem Hevorhian
this.

Porting GPL code to FreeBSD is not a good idea. A rewrite under a

BSD

Post by Cy Schubert
license would work though.

Or requesting and acquiring for ALL authors of ALL needed files to be
BSD-compatiblly licensed (including dual or more licenced in

conjunction

with GPL)?

Dual licensing is ok. but one of the licenses must be BSD as opposed to
BSD-compatibility.
BSD is compatible with GPL but many users of FreeBSD are afraid that GPL

Post by Cy Schubert
FreeBSD will make it GPL and therefore useless for their purposes.
BSD-compatibility is not enough. It should also be BSD licensed.

It depends on from which side of view.
Let's limit "can we borrow any code without violating its license?"
here.
From the point of view from GPL'ed software, BSD license is
100% compatible.
OTOH, from the point of view from BSD licensed software, GPL is
incompatible (because BSD license does not force licensees to make
their modified/added codes to be GPL'ed).
And FreeBSD has, for example, CDDL'ed codes like OpenZFS in tree,
without any action to delete them, unlile GPL'ed ones.
This is, (my understanding is) because CDDL is considered as
BSD-compatible license. There are more, for example, MIT license and so
on.
So any of BSD-compatible license is/are included in multiple licenses
of the codes, FreeBSD can introduce it in tree.
This is my guess.

Post by Cy Schubert
--
Cheers,
e^(i*pi)+1=0

Cy Schubert

2024-10-21 00:17:25 UTC

In message <***@dec.sakura.ne.jp>,
Tomoaki

On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 12:41:05 -0700
c

Porting GPL code to FreeBSD is not a good idea. A rewrite under a BSD
license would work though.

Or requesting and acquiring for ALL authors of ALL needed files to be
BSD-compatiblly licensed (including dual or more licenced in conjunction
with GPL)?

Dual licensing is ok. but one of the licenses must be BSD as opposed to
BSD-compatibility.
BSD is compatible with GPL but many users of FreeBSD are afraid that GPL in
FreeBSD will make it GPL and therefore useless for their purposes.

BSD-compatibility is not enough. It should also be BSD licensed.
--
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <***@cschubert.com>
FreeBSD UNIX: <***@FreeBSD.org> Web: https://FreeBSD.org
NTP: <***@nwtime.org> Web: https://nwtime.org

e^(i*pi)+1=0

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

Tomoaki AOKI

2024-10-21 11:29:04 UTC

On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 17:17:25 -0700

Post by Cy Schubert
Tomoaki

On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 12:41:05 -0700
c

Porting GPL code to FreeBSD is not a good idea. A rewrite under a BSD
license would work though.

Or requesting and acquiring for ALL authors of ALL needed files to be
BSD-compatiblly licensed (including dual or more licenced in conjunction
with GPL)?

It depends on from which side of view.
Let's limit "can we borrow any code without violating its license?"
here.

From the point of view from GPL'ed software, BSD license is
100% compatible.

OTOH, from the point of view from BSD licensed software, GPL is
incompatible (because BSD license does not force licensees to make
their modified/added codes to be GPL'ed).

And FreeBSD has, for example, CDDL'ed codes like OpenZFS in tree,
without any action to delete them, unlile GPL'ed ones.

This is, (my understanding is) because CDDL is considered as
BSD-compatible license. There are more, for example, MIT license and so
on.

So any of BSD-compatible license is/are included in multiple licenses
of the codes, FreeBSD can introduce it in tree.

This is my guess.

Post by Cy Schubert
--
Cheers,
e^(i*pi)+1=0

--
Tomoaki AOKI <***@dec.sakura.ne.jp>

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

Ярослав Машко

2024-10-23 22:13:19 UTC

hello, Artem,

if u no get it, the discusion hare is more about ethical and legal point of
view. this is the very first thing that shall be settled.

other than that... if you Artem is russian, i would not help you. in
today's ukraine there is much interest in all this wi-fi topic. drones is a
one area where it will be used. and drones carry explosives.

so use your ÐžÐŒÐ¿ÐŸÑÑÐŸÐ·Ð°ÐŒÐµÑÐµÐœÐžÐµ rather. russia proudly declaring that it will
have their very own analogues of a software. so do your own.

Post by Artem Hevorhian
Let me rephrase.
I would like to modernize the wifi stack so that ioctls are not used
anymore in ifconfig scan operation, for example. I would like to use
netlink instead.
Ð¿Ðœ, 21 Ð¶ÐŸÐ²Ñ. 2024, 14:29 ÐºÐŸÑÐžÑÑÑÐ²Ð°Ñ Tomoaki AOKI <

Post by Tomoaki AOKI
On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 17:17:25 -0700

Post by Cy Schubert
Tomoaki

On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 12:41:05 -0700

Post by Cy Schubert
In message

Post by Artem Hevorhian
https://github.com/bmegli/wifi-scan
Here it is. It uses nl80211.h header. I think we should do the

same on

Post by Artem Hevorhian
FreeBSD. Mentorship is required for me to work on it. Please help

me with

Post by Artem Hevorhian
this.

Porting GPL code to FreeBSD is not a good idea. A rewrite under a

BSD

Post by Cy Schubert
license would work though.

Or requesting and acquiring for ALL authors of ALL needed files to be
BSD-compatiblly licensed (including dual or more licenced in

conjunction