Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Subject | Re: freed_symbols [Re: People, not GPL [was: Re: Driver Model]] | From | David Woodhouse <> | Date | Tue, 07 Oct 2003 09:28:11 +0100 |
| |
On Mon, 2003-10-06 at 20:28 +0200, Pascal Schmidt wrote: > Now, if the driver has an internal abstraction layer that seperates the > kernel side of things from the real work the driver does, I would agree > that only the abstraction layer is a derived work and has to be GPL'd, > not the rest of the driver.
> Most drivers don't work that way because of the additional > overhead.
And because making such distinction is pointless, since the GPL'd wrapper and the core driver would not be distributed 'as separate works' but rather 'as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program', where the Program in this case is the GPL'd wrapper part.
Hence under the terms of the final paragraph of section 2 of the GPL, the code of the driver would also have to be released under the same terms.
-- dwmw2
- 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |