Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: GPLv3 Position Statement | From | Krzysztof Halasa <> | Date | Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:01:19 +0200 |
| |
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> 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 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/
| |