Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 22:17:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 22:17:35 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]:31923 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 22:16:35 -0500 From: Richard Stallman To: akpm@digeo.com CC: andre@pyxtechnologies.com, riel@conectiva.com.br, andrew@indranet.co.nz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-reply-to: <3E179CCF.F4CAE1E5@digeo.com> (message from Andrew Morton on Sat, 04 Jan 2003 18:47:43 -0800) Subject: Re: Linux iSCSI Initiator, OpenSource (fwd) (Re: Gauntlet Set NOW!) Reply-to: rms@gnu.org References: <3E179CCF.F4CAE1E5@digeo.com> Message-Id: Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 22:25:11 -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 994 Lines: 22 I suggest that if a function happens to be implemented as an inline in a header then it should be treated (for licensing purposes) as an exported-to-all-modules symbol. So in Linux, that would be LGPL-ish. The Linux developers can certainly do this, if the copyright holders of the substantial functions in question go along with it. Even if they already went along with linking to their functions from non-free modules, this is still somewhat different. The question only arises for the specific non-small functions that are to be inlined in headers in this way. (Inlining a very small function from a header is probably not significant for copyright.) Perhaps the copyright holders of these functions are few and easy to ask. - 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/