From justin.guerinot at capgemini.com Mon Apr 1 14:58:11 2019 From: justin.guerinot at capgemini.com (GUERINOT, Justin) Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 14:58:11 +0000 Subject: Use of the rtl-sdr library Message-ID: Hello, I am trying to develop a simple application using rtlsdr's library functions as simple as rtlsdr_get_device_count(). But, at the moment of compilation GCC is unable to find the reference to the function and exit the errors : ? Undefinded reference to the function rtlsdr_get_device_count() ; ? ? ld returned 1 exit status ? My code is below : #include #include #include ?/usr/include/rtl-sdr.h ? int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { int device_count ; device_count = rtlsdr_get_device_count() ; printf(? Device ID : %d ?, device_count) ; return 0 ; } That sounds normal because source code and headers files are dispatched in different files and not compiled. A solution would be to copy each headers, each sources together and compile them. But it should take a lot of times... It should exists another solution but I don't find it. For example, in the acarsdec software, how the developer was able to compile his software ? I hope I well explained my issue, Thank you in advance for your help Best regards, ____________________________________________________________________ Justin Gu?rinot Intern | Capgemini Digital Engineering & Manufacturing Services Capgemini France | Toulouse Mob.: + 33 6 33 77 14 32 www.capgemini.com [https://visualidentity.capgemini.com/capgemini.png] ____________________________________________________________________ Connect with Capgemini: [cid:image002.png at 01D41855.E5D1B680][cid:image003.png at 01D41855.E5D1B680] [cid:image004.png at 01D41855.E5D1B680] [cid:image005.png at 01D41855.E5D1B680] [cid:image006.png at 01D41855.E5D1B680] [cid:image007.png at 01D41855.E5D1B680] [cid:image009.png at 01D41855.E5D1B680] Please consider the environment and do not print this email unless absolutely necessary. Capgemini encourages environmental awareness. This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 4046 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 608 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 515 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.png Type: image/png Size: 425 bytes Desc: image004.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.png Type: image/png Size: 488 bytes Desc: image005.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.png Type: image/png Size: 450 bytes Desc: image006.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image007.png Type: image/png Size: 649 bytes Desc: image007.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.png Type: image/png Size: 564 bytes Desc: image008.png URL: From setzero at protonmail.com Sun Apr 14 06:26:10 2019 From: setzero at protonmail.com (Setzero) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 06:26:10 +0000 Subject: MacOS Sierra Support Message-ID: Hi all I am trying to use osmocom fl2k in my macbook pro. I have compiled the software but when I plugged the new falcon 2000 base usb3 to vga adapter I am not getting that in USB list. Please guide me , should i need any specific driver? And the next steps Thank you -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From richard at codingstudios.com Tue Apr 16 00:35:19 2019 From: richard at codingstudios.com (Richard Frye) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:35:19 -0400 Subject: License Message-ID: If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already installed on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? Thanks, Richard -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gdt at lexort.com Tue Apr 16 00:45:37 2019 From: gdt at lexort.com (Greg Troxel) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:45:37 -0400 Subject: License In-Reply-To: (Richard Frye's message of "Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:35:19 -0400") References: Message-ID: Richard Frye writes: > If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already installed > on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? IANAL, TINLA. rtl-sdr and osmo-sdr both appear to be GNU GPLv2. The standard interpretation is that if you create a derived work by writing a program that uses those libraries, then distributing that derived work requires permission from the copyright holders of the used libraries. And, that permission is only available if you license your work under the same license, GPLv2. That is the point of the license. If you want to write software and not distribute it at all, that's another matter, and the standard interpetation is that this is ok. What are you trying to write, and what are you thinking about for licensing, other than GPLv2? From 246tnt at gmail.com Tue Apr 16 08:15:46 2019 From: 246tnt at gmail.com (Sylvain Munaut) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 10:15:46 +0200 Subject: License In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yes if you want to distribute it needs to be with a GPL compatible license. On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:35 AM Richard Frye wrote: > > If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already installed on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? > > Thanks, > Richard From richard at codingstudios.com Tue Apr 16 11:36:11 2019 From: richard at codingstudios.com (Richard Frye) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 07:36:11 -0400 Subject: License In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I want to write a program that is for sale without releasing all of the source code. Some of it is fine but parts are proprietary. Does it matter if I dynamically link the rtlsdr library? -Richard On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:45 PM Greg Troxel wrote: > Richard Frye writes: > > > If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already > installed > > on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? > > IANAL, TINLA. > > rtl-sdr and osmo-sdr both appear to be GNU GPLv2. > > The standard interpretation is that if you create a derived work by > writing a program that uses those libraries, then distributing that > derived work requires permission from the copyright holders of the used > libraries. And, that permission is only available if you license your > work under the same license, GPLv2. That is the point of the license. > > If you want to write software and not distribute it at all, that's > another matter, and the standard interpetation is that this is ok. > > What are you trying to write, and what are you thinking about for > licensing, other than GPLv2? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From 246tnt at gmail.com Tue Apr 16 12:25:43 2019 From: 246tnt at gmail.com (Sylvain Munaut) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:25:43 +0200 Subject: License In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > I want to write a program that is for sale without releasing all of the source code. Some of it is fine but parts are proprietary. Does it matter if I dynamically link the rtlsdr library? It doesn't matter. Cheers, Sylvain From 246tnt at gmail.com Tue Apr 16 12:27:18 2019 From: 246tnt at gmail.com (Sylvain Munaut) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:27:18 +0200 Subject: License In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See : https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL which deal explicitely with this case. On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:25 PM Sylvain Munaut <246tnt at gmail.com> wrote: > > > I want to write a program that is for sale without releasing all of the source code. Some of it is fine but parts are proprietary. Does it matter if I dynamically link the rtlsdr library? > > It doesn't matter. > > Cheers, > > Sylvain From mueller at kit.edu Tue Apr 16 12:16:52 2019 From: mueller at kit.edu (=?utf-8?B?TcO8bGxlciwgTWFyY3VzIChDRUwp?=) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 12:16:52 +0000 Subject: License In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am, too, not a lawyer, but: The GPL is meant to ensure exactly what you plan to do doesn't happen: If you distribute a program based on librtlsdr, the person receiving your software has a right to its source code. Dynamically linking usually doesn't change that fact; that's interaction directly between machine code through shared state/memory. Best regards, Marcus On Tue, 2019-04-16 at 07:36 -0400, Richard Frye wrote: > I want to write a program that is for sale without releasing all of the source code. Some of it is fine but parts are proprietary. Does it matter if I dynamically link the rtlsdr library? > > -Richard > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:45 PM Greg Troxel wrote: > > Richard Frye writes: > > > > > If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already installed > > > on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? > > > > IANAL, TINLA. > > > > rtl-sdr and osmo-sdr both appear to be GNU GPLv2. > > > > The standard interpretation is that if you create a derived work by > > writing a program that uses those libraries, then distributing that > > derived work requires permission from the copyright holders of the used > > libraries. And, that permission is only available if you license your > > work under the same license, GPLv2. That is the point of the license. > > > > If you want to write software and not distribute it at all, that's > > another matter, and the standard interpetation is that this is ok. > > > > What are you trying to write, and what are you thinking about for > > licensing, other than GPLv2? > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 6582 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tom at tswartz.net Tue Apr 16 11:50:36 2019 From: tom at tswartz.net (Tom Swartz) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 07:50:36 -0400 Subject: License In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not a lawyer, caveats abound, and all that, but; Excerpt from GPL's licence FAQ: *The program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. This means that combination of the GPL-covered plug-in with the non-free main program would violate the GPL.* So, it sounds like either way you're likely to need to release under GPL or find a different library. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, 07:36 Richard Frye wrote: > I want to write a program that is for sale without releasing all of the > source code. Some of it is fine but parts are proprietary. Does it matter > if I dynamically link the rtlsdr library? > > -Richard > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:45 PM Greg Troxel wrote: > >> Richard Frye writes: >> >> > If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already >> installed >> > on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? >> >> IANAL, TINLA. >> >> rtl-sdr and osmo-sdr both appear to be GNU GPLv2. >> >> The standard interpretation is that if you create a derived work by >> writing a program that uses those libraries, then distributing that >> derived work requires permission from the copyright holders of the used >> libraries. And, that permission is only available if you license your >> work under the same license, GPLv2. That is the point of the license. >> >> If you want to write software and not distribute it at all, that's >> another matter, and the standard interpetation is that this is ok. >> >> What are you trying to write, and what are you thinking about for >> licensing, other than GPLv2? >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From richard at codingstudios.com Tue Apr 16 13:30:44 2019 From: richard at codingstudios.com (Richard Frye) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:30:44 -0400 Subject: License In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: That is what I thought but I wanted to double check. Thanks for the help. -Richard On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, 8:55 AM Tom Swartz wrote: > Not a lawyer, caveats abound, and all that, but; > > Excerpt from GPL's licence FAQ: > > *The program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to > each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single > program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and > the plug-ins. This means that combination of the GPL-covered plug-in with > the non-free main program would violate the GPL.* > > So, it sounds like either way you're likely to need to release under GPL > or find a different library. > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, 07:36 Richard Frye > wrote: > >> I want to write a program that is for sale without releasing all of the >> source code. Some of it is fine but parts are proprietary. Does it matter >> if I dynamically link the rtlsdr library? >> >> -Richard >> >> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:45 PM Greg Troxel wrote: >> >>> Richard Frye writes: >>> >>> > If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already >>> installed >>> > on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? >>> >>> IANAL, TINLA. >>> >>> rtl-sdr and osmo-sdr both appear to be GNU GPLv2. >>> >>> The standard interpretation is that if you create a derived work by >>> writing a program that uses those libraries, then distributing that >>> derived work requires permission from the copyright holders of the used >>> libraries. And, that permission is only available if you license your >>> work under the same license, GPLv2. That is the point of the license. >>> >>> If you want to write software and not distribute it at all, that's >>> another matter, and the standard interpetation is that this is ok. >>> >>> What are you trying to write, and what are you thinking about for >>> licensing, other than GPLv2? >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From leif at sm5bsz.com Tue Apr 16 19:55:00 2019 From: leif at sm5bsz.com (Leif Asbrink) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 21:55:00 +0200 Subject: License In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190416215500.d1fda182f5fffaa987c2b87d@sm5bsz.com> Hello Richard, have a look at rtl_tcp. You would need users to run rtl_tcp and then you should be able to get the data from the network with your own proprietary software. I have no experience with rtl_tcp, but it it would not do precisely what you want you can modify it and make your modified version available with an opensource license. As I understand things: Once the data is on your local network it has left the world of open source and you should be free to process it whatever way you want. Regards Leif > If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already installed > on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? > > Thanks, > Richard From 246tnt at gmail.com Tue Apr 16 20:22:36 2019 From: 246tnt at gmail.com (Sylvain Munaut) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 22:22:36 +0200 Subject: License In-Reply-To: <20190416215500.d1fda182f5fffaa987c2b87d@sm5bsz.com> References: <20190416215500.d1fda182f5fffaa987c2b87d@sm5bsz.com> Message-ID: Note that bundling any specifically modified version or rtl_tcp would fall under circumvention ... On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:11 PM Leif Asbrink wrote: > > Hello Richard, > > have a look at rtl_tcp. > > You would need users to run rtl_tcp and then you should > be able to get the data from the network with your own > proprietary software. > > I have no experience with rtl_tcp, but it it would not > do precisely what you want you can modify it and make > your modified version available with an opensource license. > > As I understand things: Once the data is on your local > network it has left the world of open source and you > should be free to process it whatever way you want. > > Regards > > Leif > > > > If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already installed > > on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? > > > > Thanks, > > Richard From chibill110 at gmail.com Tue Apr 16 20:40:05 2019 From: chibill110 at gmail.com (Bill Gaylord) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:40:05 -0500 Subject: License In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just because this is being brought up. Does this mean you can use a GPL compatible license and must use GPL? Sent from my iPad > On Apr 16, 2019, at 6:50 AM, Tom Swartz wrote: > > Not a lawyer, caveats abound, and all that, but; > > Excerpt from GPL's licence FAQ: > > The program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. This means that combination of the GPL-covered plug-in with the non-free main program would violate the GPL. > > So, it sounds like either way you're likely to need to release under GPL or find a different library. > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL > > >> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, 07:36 Richard Frye wrote: >> I want to write a program that is for sale without releasing all of the source code. Some of it is fine but parts are proprietary. Does it matter if I dynamically link the rtlsdr library? >> >> -Richard >> >>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:45 PM Greg Troxel wrote: >>> Richard Frye writes: >>> >>> > If I write software that uses the rtlsdr library that is already installed >>> > on the computer, does my software also have to be opensource? >>> >>> IANAL, TINLA. >>> >>> rtl-sdr and osmo-sdr both appear to be GNU GPLv2. >>> >>> The standard interpretation is that if you create a derived work by >>> writing a program that uses those libraries, then distributing that >>> derived work requires permission from the copyright holders of the used >>> libraries. And, that permission is only available if you license your >>> work under the same license, GPLv2. That is the point of the license. >>> >>> If you want to write software and not distribute it at all, that's >>> another matter, and the standard interpetation is that this is ok. >>> >>> What are you trying to write, and what are you thinking about for >>> licensing, other than GPLv2? >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: