Re: GPL issues

[Stefan Smietanowski <stesmi@stesmi.com>]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> <obligatory_ianal_marker>
> 
>>Suppose I use the linux-vrf patch for the kernel that is freely
>>available and use the extended setsocket options such as SO_VRF in an
>>application, do I have to release my application under GPL since I am
>>using a facility in the kernel that a standard linux kernel does not
>>provide?
>>
> 
> 
> If vrf has no other uses besides your proprietary application, I'd shudder.

So in order for you not to shudder the vrf people have to write a GPL'd
program or convince someone else to write one?

That sounds .. really odd.

Or more to the point, someone ONLY writes kernelmode stuff, doesn't
touch userspace at all. A proprietary app shows up that uses it,
and all of a sudden this guy's kernelmode whatever is disliked
cause noone wrote any GPL'd program for it?

That's almost forcing the person who wrote the kernel part to write
a GPL'd program JUST because there is a proprietary program using
his stuff - and THAT is insane.

// Stefan

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature