Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> writes:
> But the whole point was to just show how silly the whole "upgradable" vs
> "not upgradable" discussion is. We're literally talking about something
> where apparently it matters to the GPLv3 whether a pin on a chip is
> connected to software or hardware (or not at all). Is that sane?
I admit I haven't read the last GPLv3 draft, but for me the "freedom"
(=> benefit) is not the ability to alter software in some specific
existing device, but rather to take the software, perhaps modify it
and use in _my_ hardware device.
I can't use a modified kernel with their TIVO platform? No problem,
Chinese can make a better one, or maybe some mini ITX board from
VIA would do.
Though I think "upgrading" engine settings of my car could be nice,
never had time to look at it :-)
--
Krzysztof Halasa
-
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]
