Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 18 Oct 2001 08:32:44 -0500 | From | "M. R. Brown" <> | Subject | Re: GPLONLY kernel symbols??? |
| |
* pierre@lineo.com <pierre@lineo.com> on Wed, Oct 17, 2001:
> > I can make a kernel driver that compiles statically > and also uses a non-GPL library, even in the form of > a binary .o file, and the "tainted" mechanism as it > is today will miss it entirely. >
Statically into the kernel? I don't think so. First off, if your "static" code isn't GPL'd you can't distribute the resultant kernel since you've violated the GPL. The tainted mechanism was designed for proprietary and/or binary-only modules without a supported license. The case you mention above can't even exist (at least, not in any publically-accessible code).
M. R. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] |  |