Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932819AbWLNPlT (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:41:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932814AbWLNPlT (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:41:19 -0500 Received: from dvhart.com ([64.146.134.43]:51441 "EHLO dvhart.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932819AbWLNPlS (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:41:18 -0500 Message-ID: <45816F98.9040602@mbligh.org> Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 07:36:56 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060922) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Jones , "Martin J. Bligh" , Linus Torvalds , Greg KH , Jonathan Corbet , Andrew Morton , "Michael K. Edwards" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: GPL only modules [was Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19] References: <20061214003246.GA12162@suse.de> <22299.1166057009@lwn.net> <20061214005532.GA12790@suse.de> <4580E37F.8000305@mbligh.org> <20061214130704.GB17565@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20061214130704.GB17565@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1368 Lines: 30 Dave Jones wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 09:39:11PM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > > The Ubuntu feisty fawn mess was a dangerous warning bell of where we're > > going. If we don't stand up at some point, and ban binary drivers, we > > will, I fear, end up with an unsustainable ecosystem for Linux when > > binary drivers become pervasive. I don't want to see Linux destroyed > > like that. > > Thing is, if kernel.org kernels get patched to disallow binary modules, > whats to stop Ubuntu (or anyone else) reverting that change in the > kernels they distribute ? The landscape doesn't really change much, > given that the majority of Linux end-users are probably running > distro kernels. I don't think they'd dare spit in our faces quite that directly. They think binary modules are permissible because we don't seem to have consistently stated an intent contradicting that - some individual developers have, but ultimately Linus hasn't. I'm not talking about any legal issues to do with derived works, copyrights or licenses - a clear statement of intent is probably all it'd take to tip the balance. M. - 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/