lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    From
    Date
    On Jun 14, 2007, Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> wrote:

    > Alexandre Oliva (aoliva@redhat.com) said:
    >> And since the specific implementation involves creating a derived work
    >> of the GPLed kernel (the signature, or the signed image, or what have
    >> you)

    > Wait, a signed filesystem image that happens to contain GPL code
    > is now a derived work? Under what sort of interpretation does *that*
    > occur?

    Is the signature not derived from the bits in the GPLed component, as
    much as it is derived from the key?

    Isn't the signature is a functional portion of the image, i.e., if I
    take it out from the system, it won't work any more?

    > (This pretty much throws the 'aggregation' premise in GPLv2 completely
    > out.)

    Not really. It could take some explicit distinguishing between
    functional and non-functional signatures, but that's about it.

    GPLv3 chose a different path to make this clarification.

    --
    Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
    FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
    Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
    Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-06-15 04:29    [W:4.077 / U:0.056 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site