Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 5 Dec 2003 09:05:51 -0800 (PST) | From | David Dyck <> | Subject | Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause? |
| |
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 at 07:06 -0800, Jesse Pollard <jesse@cats-chateau.net> wrote:
> Quite simple. If you include the Linux kernel include files you get a derived > program that must be released under GPL if you distribute that program.
When I first read this out out of context, I wondered if you were saying that any executable that I write on my libc5 linux system (and those that were compiled on libc5 systems long ago - like my copy of Adobe acrobat, and RealNetworks real audio) must have been distributed under GPL?
[ Please recall that the kernel header files were included in users programs (since /usr/include/asm and /usr/include/linux were symlinks into the kernel sources) and common include files like dirent.h, errno.h, and signal.h. This still works with libc5 and todays Linux 2.4.23. ]
You must not be saying that, since Linus said:
"There's a clarification that user-space programs that use the standard system call interfaces aren't considered derived works, but even that isn't an "exception" - it's just a statement of a border of what is clearly considered a "derived work". User programs are _clearly_ not derived works of the kernel, and as such whatever the kernel license is just doesn't matter."
And after re-reading more of the thread, you must be refering to modules that include kernel include files, right?
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/
| |