Re: 2.6.10-mm1, class_simple_* and GPL addition

From: Dave Airlie (airlied_at_gmail.com)
Date: 10/30/04

  • Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-mm1-V0.5" 
    Date:	Sat, 30 Oct 2004 21:44:22 +1000
To: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>

    >
    > So we can change things, little things like this can help everyone out,
    > even if I'm going to get a ton of nvidia user hate mail directed to me
    > after the next kernel comes out...
    >
    > Remember, binary kernel modules are a leach on our community.

    True, but now with this code change, you have (acceptable or not) made
    binary modules second class citizens of the kernel, they cannot use
    the hotplugging or any of the new device model type code, they are
    always going to be second best and more of a problem for users, udev
    for binary modules is now probably not possible, if you take Linus's
    view that binary modules that are not derived from the kernel are not
    necessarily GPL then we've made them not able to be as good as other
    kernel modules, I don't think we'll annoy any binary module vendors
    we'll just piss off users...

    personally I thought the whole _GPL thing was meant to denote
    interfaces that showed that code was derived from the kernel so should
    be under the GPL, interfaces that all drivers should use to work with
    Linux are not IMHO proving the code is derived from the kernel, they
    still could be derived from another project but just want to be a 2.6
    device driver and use hotplug or sysfs.... so they can without fear
    lie about their status to use these interfaces... as Linus has said
    previously these interfaces are advisory, only lawyers/judges can
    decide if they are enforceable....

    Dave.
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  • Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-mm1-V0.5"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: namespace support requires network modules to say "GPL"
      ... GPL simply because it must interact with namespace logic that is exported as ... GPL only symbols? ... My thinking on the namespaces have been that their interfaces are new ... core kernel interfaces that have not existed on any other kernel. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: GPL issues
      ... Userspace code that uses interfaces that was not exposed to>>userspace ... >>or when or how the syscalls are added to the kernel. ... I still do not have to GPL ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers
      ... ...The point is that old functionality is being ripped ... What I see you saying is that the interfaces are more restrictive than before. ... if you are confident that you are abiding by the terms of the GPL then there is nothing stopping you from patching the kernel to convert the EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL to just EXPORT_SYMBOL. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: GPL issues
      ... Changes to kernel --> GPL ... Userspace code that uses interfaces that was not exposed to userspace ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [RFC] kbuild: Add a binary only .o file to a module
      ... > Any objections from having this in the kernel? ... > start the usual 'binary modules should be GPL discussion']. ... To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ...
      (Linux-Kernel)