Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 07 Dec 2005 13:39:48 +0100 | From | Helge Hafting <> | Subject | Re: Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario |
| |
Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
>On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 11:18:15PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote: > > >>Besides, if the act of linking is what makes the derivative work, >>there is no problem: The GPL allows a user to make any modifications >>or combinations or derivatives whatsoever, and only imposes >>requirements when the result is distributed. The linking of the two >>works occurs only on the end user's machine. >> >> > >But if it's a module, it's probably been compiled against kernel headers. >Last time I checked, header files were covered by the GPL unless explicitly >placed under a more permissive license. How do you use something like >spinlocks without compiling in GPL code to a module? > > They can always claim that reverse engineering works both ways. Linux spinlocks can be reverse engineered, or they can search the mailing list archives for detailed explanations. :-/
Helge Hafting - 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/
| |