Re: spinlocks, the GPL, and binary-only modules

From: Xavier Bestel (xavier.bestel@free.fr)
Date: Wed Nov 20 2002 - 05:17:37 EST


Le mer 20/11/2002 à 09:12, Mark Mielke a écrit :
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 01:06:39AM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, David McIlwraith wrote:
> > > How should it? The compiler (specifically, the C preprocessor) includes
> > > the code, thus it is not the AUTHOR violating the GPL.
> > If the compiler includes a .h file, it happens because
> > the programmer told it to do so, using a #include.
>
> I was recently re-reading the GPL and I came to the following conclusion:
>
> The GPL is only an issue if the software is *distributed* with GPL
> software. Meaning -- it is not legal to distribute a linux kernel that

Yeah, that's precisely the problem here: the binary-only module is
distributed with included spinlock code, which *is* GPL.

-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Nov 23 2002 - 22:00:31 EST