Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Non-GPL export of invalidate_mmap_range | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Date | Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:51:35 +0100 |
| |
On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 01:19, Andrew Morton wrote: > "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > IBM shipped the promised SAN Filesystem some months ago. > > Neat, but it's hard to see the relevance of this to your patch. > > I don't see any licensing issues with the patch because the filesystem > which needs it clearly meets Linus's "this is not a derived work" criteria.
it does? It needed no changes to work on linux? it only uses "core unix" apis ? it needs no changes to the core kernel? *buzz* It doesn't require knowledge of deep and changing internals ? *buzz* It doesn't need changing for various kernel versions ?
I remember this baby overriding syscalls and the like not too long ago...
The word "clearly" isn't correct imo. Just because something has a few lines of code that started on another OS doesn't make it "clearly" not a derived work, at least not in my eyes.
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |