> An example could be helpful in clarifying the GPL license.
>
> 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?
Almost definitely not. Here you have two works that provide two distinctly
different functions and communicate across a well-defined boundary. In
theory, the two works could have been developed completely independently, so
one cannot be a derivative work of the other.
The thing you need to remember is that the API that userspace uses to
communicate with the kernel is itself a work. In this case, it almost
certainly is purely functional and contains no protectable, copyrightable
content. Both the kernel changes and the user-space code take only from the
API. They do not take from each other.
DS
-
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]
