| ??? 10/29/11 13:01 Read: times Msg Score: +1 +1 Good Answer/Helpful |
#184423 - A thief is a thief Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Richard Erlacher said:
If a guy builds his own linker that allows code to be loaded and executed at 0x0000 rather than 0x0800 or wherever, do you really think he's got access to the entire package? I doubt it. There is a reason why Keil don't like to generate assembly listings for the evaluation version - people have to single-step in the debugger to see the assembler - after their linker have built a binary and placed where their linker wants to place the code. I disagree ... mainly because the unscrupulous individuals who might otherwise have to buy a costly software suite such as the one under discussion would not buy it under any circumstances, hence, the vendor has lost nothing. When there are two alternatives: - being able to use the tool in a commercial project, or not being able to use it, then people who would otherwise buy a real license would look the other way and keep using the free evaluation version - even when the license specifically says it's not allowed. There are free compilers out there. Anyone who do not like the Keil license for the evaluation version really should go for SDCC and ignore the Keil tools. And anyone who thinks it's ok to discuss how to get around the evaluation limitations should be ashamed of them selves. |
