Re: [sdcc-devel] Infineon's SDCC fork

[Philipp K. K. <pk...@sp...>]

On 26.07.2016 01:37, Frieder Ferlemann wrote:
> Hi Philipp,
> 
>> How should we proceed with this issue?
> 
> not sure whether I should answer on this.
> 
> Middle digit '9' of 2.9.0 means it was around 2009.
> It had been topic on sdcc-devel (Thread by Jan Waclawek on Oct 06 2010 "[sdcc-devel] Infineon "fork" of SDCC for XC800") and violation stopped since then.

I do not know if violation stopped then. I know they are violating the
GPL now: I downloaded DAVE-Bench from Infineon a few weeks ago. It came
with an offer to provide the source, but when I contacted Infineon they
did not provide the source.

> 
> My view is that asking Infineon to stop distributing now would mainly hurt legacy users reviving 2009 projects.
> We shouldn't hurt users.
> 
> I'd personally ignore these violations as long as new (insert a reasonable timespan here) violations are not added.
> This is a matter of resources and believe that SDCC tends to out-innovate copycats as long as they are effectively stopped.
> If violation does not stop (and users don't grok they are relying on a copycat development platform that could go stale at any point in time (-> there's a social/publicity aspect to this as well)) then more heavy lifting is needed.

Having the source of the fork could help us make out own XC800 port. In
particular the fork has workaround for two hardware issues
(https://www.infineonforums.com/threads/4274-XC800-core-errata).

Philipp