[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 2.5.5] do export vmalloc_to_page to modules...
    On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Russell King wrote:

    > On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
    > > Namely, in the sense that it is inconsistent with the
    > > similar situation in the case of libraries or even system calls.
    > A GPL library can only be linked with other GPL-compatible code. A LGPL
    > library can be linked with any GPL-compatible or GPL-incompatible code.
    > The LGPL has specific clauses in it that allows you to link GPL-incompatible
    > code (see LGPL paragraph 5). It seems that you're missing that distinction.

    I wasn't actually missing that distinction and I am familiar with LGPL
    reasonably well (had to study it as we do actually make use of it at
    VERITAS). I was comparing LGPL with "Linux kernel flavour of GPL" rather
    than LGPL with GPL.

    > This is why glibc and other libraries are LGPL, not GPL. If glibc was GPL,
    > all the binary-only applications in user space would have to supply their
    > own C library.

    Yes, I know.


    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 13:25    [W:0.025 / U:55.520 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site