On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 09:01:45PM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote: > Mark wrote: > > Probably all Linux binary drivers *are* compiled using GPL'd header files, > > and thus are themselves subject to the GPL. > > I doubt that there is a consensus that simply compiling something with > a GPL header necessarily and always subjects it to the GPL. See your lawyer. For a header as in interface maybe not. For headers containing significant code in inline functions the binary drivers is definitly a derived work. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- From: Aaron Gyes <[email protected]>
- Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- From: Kyle Moffett <[email protected]>
- Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- From: Greg KH <[email protected]>
- Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- From: Aaron Gyes <[email protected]>
- Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- From: Greg KH <[email protected]>
- Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- From: Zan Lynx <[email protected]>
- Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- From: Mark Lord <[email protected]>
- Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- Prev by Date: Re: Re: sata_sil Mod15Write quirk workaround patch for vanilla kernel avaialble.
- Next by Date: Re: [patch] sched: auto-tune migration costs [was: Re: Industry db benchmark result on recent 2.6 kernels]
- Previous by thread: Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- Next by thread: Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!.
- Index(es):
 |