On Sat, Apr 01 2006, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 18:14 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 31 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > >> Jens Axboe wrote:
> > >>> On Fri, Mar 31 2006, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > >>>> On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 23:06 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > >>>>> Woe be unto he who builds their filesystems as modules.
> > >>>> since splice support is highly linux specific and new.. shouldn't these
> > >>>> be _GPL exports?
> > >>> Yes they should, I'll add that to the current splice tree.
> > >> Why? We don't usually restrict filesystems in such ways... I would
> > >> rather a binary-only module reference generic_file_splice_read() than
> > >> create its own.
> > >
> > > You could use that very same argument for any piece of the kernel, then,
> > > so I don't think that adds much value to _not_ exporting it GPL.
> >
> > Not really, because I'm considering the Real World(tm) users, not
> > abstract theory :) The other filesystem junk is exported non-GPL, and
> > existing binary-only filesystems use that stuff.
> >
> > IOW its a bit rude to say "oh you can have your BO filesystem, just not
> > splice support."
>
>
> it's a bit like saying "you can use all the standard unix interfaces,
> but these are very linux specific"; eg the same arguments for making lsm
> and other pieces _GPL; they're so linux specific that users that use
> these do so with linux in mind etc
Linus seems to agree with the _GPL not being appropriate as well, so I
guess I'll bow to the majority. This time :-)
--
Jens Axboe
-
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]
