[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <or8xajo836.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 19:19:57 -0300
From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>
To: "Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
Cc: "Al Viro" <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
"Bernd Schmidt" <bernds_cb1@...nline.de>,
"Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Daniel Hazelton" <dhazelton@...er.net>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Greg KH" <greg@...ah.com>,
"debian developer" <debiandev@...il.com>, david@...g.hm,
"Tarkan Erimer" <tarkan@...one.net.tr>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
On Jun 16, 2007, "Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com> wrote:
> On 16/06/07, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 2007, Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > How the hell does that improve the situation for users?
>>
>> Maybe it doesn't. How does it make it worse?
>>
> Now not even the vendor can upgrade the software in the hardware and
> fix problems for the user. The user loses.
Assuming the vendor's intent as for patching the software is to help
the user. If the vendor doesn't want to let the user do that
independently, why should this assumption hold?
--
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