[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4686356F.5050100@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 12:50:23 +0200
From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com>
To: Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net>
CC: 7eggert@....de, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
William D Waddington <william.waddington@...zmo.com>,
Helge Hafting <helge.hafting@...el.hist.no>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0
On 06/30/2007 04:11 AM, Daniel Hazelton wrote:
> On Friday 29 June 2007 17:27:34 Rene Herman wrote:
>> Arguably (no doubt, sigh...) someone could distribute the kernel in
>> binary form but refuse to provide source for the bits marked as being
>> in the public domain alongside it -- yes, can of worms when compared to
>> GPL demands, but I believe I can see why one shouldn't even go near
>> there.
>
> Actually, they couldn't. Second PD code became included in the kernel it
> would be covered by the GPL. If it can be shown that the kernel binary
> was the product of merging PD code in, then there is no way top refuse
> access to the PD code.
If indeed. If the PD code compiles to a standalone module then this becomes
every bit as arguable as binary modules. That's the "(no doubt, sigh)" bit.
Rene.
-
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