Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 05 Jan 2003 16:53:31 -0600 | From | David van Hoose <> | Subject | Re: Honest does not pay here ... |
| |
Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > "Adam J. Richter" <adam@yggdrasil.com> writes: > > >> I believe that the illegality of proprietary kernel modules >>has resulting in more GPL-compatible kernel code than without such >>a restriction. > > > What people like you don't understand is, that there no such thing as > a "illegal proprietary kernel module" according to the GPL. > > There is only an "illegal distribution of a proprietary binary kernel > module with the linux kernel" under the GPL. > > If Andres' customers are happy with getting a binary only module for > use with their kernel, there is no violation of the GPL by Andre. > > Regards > Henning (writing this on a computer with the nvidia > module loaded and happy about it. And > completely within the boundaries of the > GPL. No matter what RMS says).
Binary-only drivers are great as long as they work. Every such driver I have used so far has worked perfectly. I have only one problem with NVidia's driver: It refuses to compile under 2.5.54 which requires me use X's nv driver or use 2.4.21 for KDE. Anyone know how to get around that? :-)
-David
- 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/
| |