Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 3 Feb 1998 13:41:04 -0500 | | From | "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <> | | Subject | Re: What is accepted into the standard kernel sources ? |
| |
From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 17:10:30 +0000 (GMT) > specifications. The driver - the part that interfaces between the > Linux kernel and the library - is released under GPL. The library > itself is not available in source form, but could be included with the On the contrary. You can't GPL the driver as it is linked with a private binary object file and violates the license of the GPL. After our discussion I checked this viewpoint with several folks. Take it up with the FSF lawyer if you dont like it.
However, to the extent that binary-only modules are OK --- as long as you restrict yourself to the interfaces exported by /proc/ksyms (cf Linus's pronouncement that dynamically loaded kernel which adhere to the /proc/ksyms interface are to be considered the same as user programs executing in user space --- i.e., not restricted by the GPL), it should be OK for you to distribute a separate device driver package which did exactly what you described, but still linked against a private .o file.
As a practical matter though, you might want to stop and ask yourself if this is really necessary or matters. It doesn't take all that much effort to disassemble a compiled .o file, and people who think that it is difficult are just kidding themselves. I was part of one of two separate teams (one at MIT, and one in Berkeley) that disassembled the Internet Work/Virus almost a decade ago, and we did that work in less than 12 hours. True, we were motivated, but that just means someone who isn't motivated won't pull an all-nighter, and instead take a week or two to disassemble your object file and *then* post it on Usenet.
If your company can't compete if your hardware interfaces are disclosed, I'd suggest that you should take a hard look at your business model or your technology, because that should be a red flag that something might be seriously wrong. A number of companies have since released hardware information about their products, and as far as I can tell, they haven't done badly by their decision. If anything, they've sold more products as a result.
- Ted
|  |