Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Feb 2004 12:31:10 +0000 | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | Subject | Re: Non-GPL export of invalidate_mmap_range |
| |
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 04:28:58PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > OK, so I looked at the wrapper. It wasn't a tremendously pleasant > experience. It is huge, and uses fairly standard-looking filesytem > interfaces and locking primitives. Also some awareness of NFSV4 for some > reason.
And pokes deep into internal structures that it shouldn't.
> Still, the wrapper is GPL so this is not relevant.
It's BSD licensed - they couldn't distribute it together with GPFS if it was GPL.
> Its only use is to tell > us whether or not the non-GPL bits are "derived" from Linux, and it > doesn't do that.
Well, something that needs an almost one megabyte big wrapper per defintion is not a standalone work but something that's deeply interwinded with the kernel. The tons of kernel version checks certainly show it's poking deeper than it should.
> Why do you believe that GPFS represents a kernel licensing violation?
See above. Something that pokes deep into internal structures and even needs new exports certainly is a derived work. There's a few different interpretations of the derived works clause in the GPL around, the FSF one wouldn't allow binary modules at all, and Linus' one is also pretty strict.
- 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/
| |