On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 07:33:14 +0000 (UTC) PJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Gora Mohanty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [about me saying that Linus needs to ensure GPL compatible code] > > > Huh? How so? You are now making a claim that has not been voiced so > > far, namely that this is somehow in violation of the GPL. > > Linus is committed to GPL V2 for the kernel. So he is obliged to fix > code that violates that compatibility. [...] Not so. As I understand it various portions of the kernel are released under various licences, and it is possible to have something like this under the GPLv2. Part of the reason of creating the GPLv3 was to plug loopholes like this. I will reiterate that a GPL violation is a very serious matter, and one in which the FSF, and people like Eben Moglen would be very interested. Could someone please demonstrate that such has happened? > Gora Mohanty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Admittedly > > without having looked into the details of any of this, I find this > > hard to believe. At the least, there would be much more of a stink > > about this, and if it were true, vehement opposition would indeed > > be in order. > > You and me understand the issues around software freedom better than most > people. The issue here isn't that obvious. If we don't see it as obvious, > then how do you expect there to be much of a stink about it in general? Erm, the FSF for one is very militant about such things, and rightly so. > I think it is a GPL violation since a decent coder can't figure out how to > modify the disputed code that is distributed with the kernel, unlike the > original coder. So there is no way you can say it is a preferred form of > source in the GPL sense for the developer the code was distributed to. There have been endless arguments about binary drivers on lkml, and frankly, I am not personally interested enough to try and follow the details. However, from what I remember, the consensus was that it was possible to have binary drivers without violating the GPLv2. Again, the GPLv3 explicitly tries to block such loopholes. [...] > Your comparison is non-germ-ane. > > Poor joke aside, I can't see how your analogy is applicable. [...] Yeah, sorry. That started out as a poor attempt at a joke, and turned into a pointless snark. Please ignore it. Regards, Gora _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Next Event: http://freed.in - February 22-24, 2008 Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
