Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755299AbXFOC1X (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 22:27:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750909AbXFOC1Q (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 22:27:16 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:49888 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750747AbXFOC1P (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 22:27:15 -0400 To: Florin Malita Cc: Daniel Hazelton , Linus Torvalds , Adrian Bunk , Alan Cox , Greg KH , debian developer , david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 References: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr> <200706140305.50095.dhazelton@enter.net> <46717C58.8050501@gmail.com> <4671A528.5040300@gmail.com> <20070614234507.GA3860@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> From: Alexandre Oliva Organization: Red Hat OS Tools Group Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 23:25:57 -0300 In-Reply-To: <20070614234507.GA3860@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> (Bill Nottingham's message of "Thu\, 14 Jun 2007 19\:45\:08 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.990 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1401 Lines: 35 On Jun 14, 2007, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Alexandre Oliva (aoliva@redhat.com) said: >> And since the specific implementation involves creating a derived work >> of the GPLed kernel (the signature, or the signed image, or what have >> you) > Wait, a signed filesystem image that happens to contain GPL code > is now a derived work? Under what sort of interpretation does *that* > occur? Is the signature not derived from the bits in the GPLed component, as much as it is derived from the key? Isn't the signature is a functional portion of the image, i.e., if I take it out from the system, it won't work any more? > (This pretty much throws the 'aggregation' premise in GPLv2 completely > out.) Not really. It could take some explicit distinguishing between functional and non-functional signatures, but that's about it. GPLv3 chose a different path to make this clarification. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} - 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/