![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Lee Revell wrote: >On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 20:00 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: > > >>On Tuesday 01 November 2005 18:49, Alexander Fisher wrote: >> >> >>>Hello. >>> >>>A supplier of a PCI mezzanine digital IO card has provided a linux 2.4 >>>driver as source code. They have provided this code source with a >>>license stating I won't redistribute it in anyway. >>>My concern is that if I build this code into a module, I won't be able >>>to distribute it to customers without violating either the GPL (by not >>>distributing the source code), or the proprietary source code license >>>as currently imposed by the supplier. >>>From what I have read, this concern is only valid if the binary module >>>is considered to be a 'derived work' of the kernel. The module source >>>directly includes the following kernel headers : >>> >>> >>Take the code and write a specification for the device. >>Should be fairly easy. >>Someone else will pick up the spec and write a clean GPLed driver. >> >> > >Seems excessive, why not just use a kernel debugger to capture all PIO >traffic to the device and write a driver based on that? > >Lee > > > That's legal, and good advice. Jeff >- >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/ > > > - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-11-01 22:54 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||