[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3ea99d52-cafb-4c79-a78b-fdd1f9a9fcd5@tuxedocomputers.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 10:40:56 +0100
From: Werner Sembach <wse@...edocomputers.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...libre.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, tux@...edocomputers.com,
Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>,
Vinzenz Vietzke <vv@...edocomputers.com>, Christoffer Sandberg <cs@...edo.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] module: Block modules by Tuxedo from accessing GPL
symbols
Am 15.11.24 um 10:18 schrieb Greg KH:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 10:00:23AM +0100, Werner Sembach wrote:
>> I guess what I try to convince you and others is that we _are_ taking Open
>> Source licenses seriously, but still there are mistakes to be made,
>> especially with complex projects like the Linux kernel, e.g. I'm not aware
>> of any other project that uses a similar construct to
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()/MODULE_LICENSE().
> The Linux kernel is very simple from a license point of view, your code
> has to be GPLv2 compatible. That's it, nothing complex or odd about
> that at all.
Then why does the proprietary NVIDIA driver exist?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists