Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262279AbTHUACo (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:02:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262386AbTHUACo (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:02:44 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:58065 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262279AbTHUACm (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:02:42 -0400 Message-ID: <3F440C15.1050301@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:02:29 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik Organization: none User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021213 Debian/1.2.1-2.bunk X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jamie Lokier CC: Rob Landley , "Ihar 'Philips' Filipau" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH] scsi.h uses "u8" which isn't defined. References: <3F4120DD.3030108@softhome.net> <20030818190421.GN24693@gtf.org> <200308190832.24744.rob@landley.net> <20030820234810.GA24970@mail.jlokier.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20030820234810.GA24970@mail.jlokier.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1453 Lines: 47 Jamie Lokier wrote: > Well, I've done quite a bit of > > #ifdef __i386__ > #define __NR_futex 240 > #elif defined (__alpha__) > #define __NR_futex 394 > #elif defined (__mips__) > ... etc. ... > #endif > > In order to distribute programs which compile with a distro's libc but > will take advantage of features in later kernels when run on them. > > That's really unpleasant. So, in revenge, here's an annoying question: agreed. > If userspace applications are ultimately compiled using Linux header > files, indirectly included via Glibc or some other libc, and the > kernel header files are GPL (version 2 only; not LGPL or any later > GPL), isn't distributing those binary applications a gross violation > of the GPL in some cases? It's come up before, so it's not necessarily an original, annoying question ;-) My non-lawyer guess would be, the structures and defines are required for Linux interoperability; that may be a factor. static inline functions in headers, i.e. real code, is another matter too. One way or another (direct inclusion, or via glibc-kernheaders pkg) the headers today are GPL'd not LGPL'd... so I suppose it remains the realm of lawyers... IANAL, Jeff - 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/