DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au;
  h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
  b=djly5Pr4f62/6gaYkrfw4SvHWa0kkc3OpcCQvpPiW0zqmLtKxQdPtAtLYMYZiAd/XDBQFvyN2U/5ZYM9jp95NcsCKTeYvBxW4yFc0Jc8bnDzaGvzekirSwqz46PKN92Lb13LIbOzDQXJz3lMob3q7IqddvftEPIb5OaNxU2L6pU=  ;
Message-ID: <45D415DA.5010704@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:12:10 +1100
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051007 Debian/1.7.12-1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: v j <vj.linux@gmail.com>
CC: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers
References: <9b3a62ab0702142115m4ea7d2c0m6869eb64ef3ee14e@mail.gmail.com>	 <9b3a62ab0702142116n4069e16cl1bc8f546f41d935@mail.gmail.com>	 <20070215061149.GE15654@redhat.com>	 <9b3a62ab0702142227j19386132s870a0e745cfbb8d1@mail.gmail.com>	 <20070214231143.11ff6b46.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <9b3a62ab0702142328h87365b6i932d4f2c117f7f0e@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9b3a62ab0702142328h87365b6i932d4f2c117f7f0e@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2314
Lines: 60

v j wrote:
> On 2/14/07, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net> wrote:
> 
>> At least one of us is confused about that an embedded User is.
>> It seems to me that you are an embedded developer, not User.
>> I doubt that most Embedded Users care what their OS is,
>> or even know what an OS is.
> 
> 
> I am not sure what the difference is. We are trying to use Linux to
> support our application. It may be that Linux has a bug, or our
> application. When it is Linux, that has the problem, I  have tried to
> inform the community of that.


The difference is that you are selling it and not contributing back.

I think the legal term is something like distributing copyright
material without a license.


>> > Not everybody has to be a contributor. The reason Linux is popular is
>> > because of its openness. Take that away and see where it goes.
>>
>> We seem to have different definitions of open and closed.
> 
> 
> Open = 3rd party Linux drivers can be loaded. Closed = No third party
> Linux drivers can be loaded.


So most linux kernel developers chose to contribute to Linux because
they prefer something closer to the GPL's notion of open (assuming
your definitions are in the context of the legality of redistributing
the end result).

Don't take offence, but most of us don't _want_ the embedded
developers who contribute nothing back. Even if you tripled the total
Linux userbase, how would that be a good thing for anyone but yourself?

Now imagine if nobody contributed anything back.

The reason Linux is good enough that you chose in the first place is
because of everyone contributing back. Why would we want to undermine
that? My aim for Linux is not to have it shut down VxWorks, or to have
a huge userbase, but to be the best OS out there.

Maybe that helps explain the why others here don't share your opinion?

With that said, there are some reasonable free BSD licensed operating
systems out there that you can use without opening your source.

-- 
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
-
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/