Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751589AbXBOGYK (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 01:24:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751585AbXBOGYK (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 01:24:10 -0500 Received: from mail.velocitynet.com.au ([203.17.154.25]:56080 "EHLO m0.velocity.net.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751593AbXBOGYJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 01:24:09 -0500 Message-ID: <45D3FC67.3000903@iinet.net.au> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:23:35 +1100 From: Ben Nizette User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: v j CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers References: <9b3a62ab0702142115m4ea7d2c0m6869eb64ef3ee14e@mail.gmail.com> <9b3a62ab0702142116n4069e16cl1bc8f546f41d935@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9b3a62ab0702142116n4069e16cl1bc8f546f41d935@mail.gmail.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: 2205 Lines: 42 v j wrote: > This is in reference to the following thread: > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/14/63 > > I am not sure if this is ever addressed in LKML, but linux is _very_ > popular in the embedded space. We (an embedded vendor) chose Linux 3 > years back because of its lack of royalty model, robustness and > availability of infinite number of open-source tools. [...] > However we have a worrying trend here. If at some point it becomes > illegal to load our modules into the linux kernel, then it is > unacceptable to us. We would have been better off choosing VxWorks or > OSE 3 years ago when we made an OS choice. The fact that Linux is > becoming more and more closed is very very alarming. > Question to the world here: Distros make, as a matter of course, a series of modifications to the Linux Kernel so that their modules or features work. What stops VJ making a patchset which effectively s/EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL/EXPORT_SYMBOL/g 's the kernel source then distributing that under the GPL? He then supplies his un-GPL'd modules to the world which just happen to only run on the modified kernel. I've read the GPL of course (IANAL though) and I can't see what this violates except the /spirit/ of the license. Don't get me wrong, I'm strongly against anyone doing what I just mentioned, I believe it to be immoral taking someone's GPL'd code and mangling it in such a way. I speak as an embedded developer myself whose company decided that running our code under Linux and distributing our code under the GPL was far preferable to running closed-source software on a closed-source platform. I'll finish off to VJ: If you want to be alarmed, go ahead and switch to VxWorks, the Linux community will live on. It might have a smaller user-base in embedded-land but that's the nature of the beast. A large user-base doesn't mean much to something like linux unless it comes with a large, open-source-minded developer-base. --Ben. - 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/