Re: GPL license and linux kernel modifications

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 19:25:55 +0300, =?koi8-r?Q?=22?=Bansh=?koi8-r?Q?=22=20?= <bansh21@xxxxxxx>  said:

> It looks like one can make a preprocessor or even one's own compiler (with
> one's syntax) which will be used for kernel building. But it's not required to
> distribute this compiler. So I can distribute linux kernel source code modified
> this way but no one will be able to build it. Is it ok?

Sure.  If you wrote the code in APL, it would be quite unreadable, and you could
distribute it.  See Bliss/32 (DEC) or PL/S (IBM) for examples of languages
that were used to write systems and the code distributed without a compiler.
(Note that I know of no source code in Bliss/32 or PL/S that was actually
distributed under the GPL).

> Such compiler/preprocessor can be really very tricky and can hide the
> modifications very much, thus allowing to hide proprietary know-how.

Yes, but it has to be the *preferred* source form.  So you have to distribute
what you're actually using to maintain the system.  You want to claim that
the very tricky code is your preferred form, go right ahead.  Let me know how
the first time you try to fix a bug goes. ;)

It is most certainly *NOT* allowed to pass your code through a obfuscator
before shipping it out.

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature