linux-kernel - Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706261013230.23285@asgard.lang.hm>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jun 2007 10:17:23 -0700 (PDT)
From:	david@...g.hm
To:	Alexandre Oliva <oliva@....ic.unicamp.br>
cc:	Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

> On Jun 26, 2007, Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com> wrote:
>
>> I read your scenario of the vendor not giving you the source to mean: not
>> directly; i.e.  they could give you a third-party download link.
>
> This has never been enough to comply with GPLv2.
>
> FWIW, it is one of the improvements in GPLv3.

either it's an improvement in the GPLv3 or it's a violation of GPLv2.

you can't say that the GPLv2 prohibits it _and_ it's an improvement in the 
GPLv3.

unless you are saying that the GPLv3 is saying that a third party link now 
_is_ sufficiant. this seems to be counter to what the FSF is claiming 
(with good reasoning. after all, you don't control the third party site, 
so it could change or go away and now the people who got the binaries from 
you can't get the sources)

David Lang

-
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/