[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: GPLv3 Position Statement
Linus Torvalds <> writes:

> But the whole point was to just show how silly the whole "upgradable" vs
> "not upgradable" discussion is. We're literally talking about something
> where apparently it matters to the GPLv3 whether a pin on a chip is
> connected to software or hardware (or not at all). Is that sane?

I admit I haven't read the last GPLv3 draft, but for me the "freedom"
(=> benefit) is not the ability to alter software in some specific
existing device, but rather to take the software, perhaps modify it
and use in _my_ hardware device.

I can't use a modified kernel with their TIVO platform? No problem,
Chinese can make a better one, or maybe some mini ITX board from
VIA would do.

Though I think "upgrading" engine settings of my car could be nice,
never had time to look at it :-)
Krzysztof Halasa
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: 2006-09-27 23:03    [W:0.065 / U:0.640 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site