[lkml]   [2001]   [Jun]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: [PATCH] sockreg2.4.5-05 inet[6]_create() register/unregister table

George Bonser writes:
> There is, of course, one basic problem with that argument. While you can say
> (and probably rightly so) that such a change would not be included in Linus'
> kernel, I think anyone is allowed to post a patch that might make it
> possible to add protocols as modules. If anyone chooses to use it is each
> individual's decision but you could not prevent ACME from creating a patch
> that allows protocol modules as long as they distributed the patch. Also, I
> know that you are allowed to distribute proprietary modules in binary form
> but are there any restrictions on what function these modules can perform?
> I don't remember seeing any such restrictions.

People can post whatever patches which do whatever, sure.
But this isn't what matters.

What matters is the API under which a binary-only module may interface
to the kernel. Linus specifies that only the module exports in his
tree fall into this API.

As I stated in another email, the allowance of binary-only kernel
modules is a special exception to the licensing of the kernel made by
Linus. The GPL by itself, does not allow this at all.

David S. Miller

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:54    [W:0.175 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site