[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <653402b90702152240x5b242b65q5aaf347e2b6e2460@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 07:40:02 +0100
From: "Miguel Ojeda" <maxextreme@...il.com>
To: "v j" <vj.linux@...il.com>
Cc: "Trent Waddington" <trent.waddington@...il.com>,
"David Lang" <david.lang@...italinsight.com>,
"Scott Preece" <sepreece@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers
On 2/16/07, v j <vj.linux@...il.com> wrote:
> > It's written in black and white, in the license.
>
> Please point me to where it says I cannot load proprietary modules in
> the Kernel.
>
> > Apart from that,
> > Greg KH has made his opinion clear, and you have said you understand
> > and don't debate that he holds this opinion, and his code is what you
> > said you were linking to (the sysfs/class stuff), so why do you keep
> > saying that "it is not clear".
>
> I know his opinion. I don't debate his opinion. It is his code. I
> choose not to use his code because of the license issue.
>
> > Do you think that, somehow, Linus' opinion trumps Greg KH's opinion on
> > his own code?
>
> No, just that the trend is disturbing. If enough Kernel Developers
> choose to write their Software in a way that prevents others from
> using it freely, then that is troubling. Especially when these Kernel
Isn't there a big difference between "use GPL code" and "modify GPL
code, link closed modules to it & redistribute everything as
binaries"?
--
Miguel Ojeda
http://maxextreme.googlepages.com/index.htm
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists