[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2.5.5] do export vmalloc_to_page to modules...
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Russell King wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> > Namely, in the sense that it is inconsistent with the
> > similar situation in the case of libraries or even system calls.
> A GPL library can only be linked with other GPL-compatible code. A LGPL
> library can be linked with any GPL-compatible or GPL-incompatible code.
> The LGPL has specific clauses in it that allows you to link GPL-incompatible
> code (see LGPL paragraph 5). It seems that you're missing that distinction.

I wasn't actually missing that distinction and I am familiar with LGPL
reasonably well (had to study it as we do actually make use of it at
VERITAS). I was comparing LGPL with "Linux kernel flavour of GPL" rather
than LGPL with GPL.

> This is why glibc and other libraries are LGPL, not GPL. If glibc was GPL,
> all the binary-only applications in user space would have to supply their
> own C library.

Yes, I know.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.235 / U:4.016 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site