Alan Cox wrote:
On Mer, 2006-03-15 at 11:24 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
+ * under the terms of version 2.1 of the GNU Lesser General Public License
+ * as published by the Free Software Foundation.
+ *
LGPL inside the kernel doesn't make a whole lot of sense.... better make
it GPL.
When you combine an LGPL and GPL work you get a GPL work so yes it would
be clearer to mark it GPL as that is what it became as it was merged,
but perhaps to add a note stating where it can be obtained under other
licenses for other projects.
Thanks. The LGPL usage is a mistake in the core code....will change to GPL
everywhere except the case below. There's no intent to have the kernel
code available
under other licenses etc. so thats not a problem.
However, the confusion about what license to use for a header file that
will need to be
included in a potentially non-GPL user application persists. The header file
include/linux/taskstats.h, created in patch 9/9
http://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0603.1/1925.html
defines the user-kernel messaging interface and should probably continue
to have LGPL,
just to be absolutely safe legally. I've not been following the legal
twists too carefully so
its probably overkill.
--Shailabh
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
