[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <orire0dp29.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 03:15:10 -0200
From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>
To: davids@...master.com
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers
On Feb 17, 2007, "David Schwartz" <davids@...master.com> wrote:
>> On Saturday 17 February 2007 03:42, David Schwartz wrote:
>>
>> > Again, see Lexmark v. Static Controls. If "make a toner cartridge
>> > that works with a particular Lexmark printer" is a functional
>> > idea, why is "make a graphics driver that works with a particular
>> > Linux kernel" not? What is the difference you think matters?
>> That you cannot build such modules without integrating parts of
>> actual Linux kernel code (via #includes etc), whereas you can build
>> compatible toner cartridges without using any original component.
> Static Controls actually put a copy of Lexmark's 'Toner Loading Program' on
> each compatible cartridge they made. The printer actually copies the TLP off
> the cartridge. In other words, to make a compatible catridge, you do have to
> use an original component. (Or at least, it's much more difficult not to.)
Besides, you *can* build a module for Linux without using any kernel
code. It just takes a lot of work to implement all you'd otherwise
need from the kernel in a clean-room fashion.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@...dhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@...d.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
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