Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Tue, 6 May 2003 23:31:27 +0100 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: Using GPL'd Linux drivers with non-GPL, binary-only kernel |
| |
Alan Cox wrote: > > What if this new-fangled other kernel is open source, but BSD license > > instead? Would that also anger the kernel developers? (As I suspect > > a closed-source binary kernel would, even if one could get away with it). > > Then the combined result would be a GPL'd product. You can do that now. > Add BSD code to GPL and the result comes out GPL.
I disagree - as Pavel said, "if it's running in your kernel's userspace", the GPL applies only to the thing running in that "userspace", not to the whole combined machine.
> > Then, you can (a) rewrite everything, using the knowledge you gained > > from reading the various open source drivers, or (b) just use those > > drivers, and save a lot of effort. > > The GPL says "you can use them if your final new result is GPL", the BSD > world says "Hey go do it, just say thanks". Its probably a lot simpler > to use the FreeBSD code if you don't want a GPL result.
I understand the licensing in unambiguous causes, and I'm not trying to find loopholes in awkward corners. I'm just observing that, as closed-source binary modules are de facto accepted (with some funky rules about which interfaces they can use), the same in reverse _ought_ to be accepted to the same degree: Linux (and other) GPL'd modules as satellites around a non-GPL kernel.
> For myself I'd be willing to discuss relicensing code in some cases but > there is little that has a single author.
Thanks.
-- Jamie
- 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) |