Messages in this thread |  | | From | "Kendall Bennett" <> | Date | Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:48:45 -0800 | Subject | RE: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause? |
| |
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
> In fact, a user program written in 1991 is actually still likely > to run, if it doesn't do a lot of special things. So user programs > really are a hell of a lot more insulated than kernel modules, > which have been known to break weekly.
IMHO (and IANAL of course), it seems a bit tenuous to me the argument that just because you deliberating break compatibility at the module level on a regular basis, that they are automatically derived works. Clearly the module interfaces could be stabilised and published, and if you consider the instance of a single kernel version in time, that module ABI *is* published and *is* stable *for that version*. Just because you make an active effort to change things and actively *not* document the ABI other than in the source code across kernel versions, doesn't automatically make a module a derived work.
IMHO anyway.
Regards,
--- Kendall Bennett Chief Executive Officer SciTech Software, Inc. Phone: (530) 894 8400 http://www.scitechsoft.com
~ SciTech SNAP - The future of device driver technology! ~
- 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/
|  |