[file interface] Re: Module Licensing?

From: Roger Larsson (roger.larsson@skelleftea.mail.telia.com)
Date: Sun Nov 04 2001 - 23:40:18 EST


On Tuesday 30 October 2001 18:27, Timur Tabi wrote:
> TimO wrote:
> > Ugghh! Don't confuse/equate MODULE_LICENSE with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL_ONLY;
> > two different animals, two differnet goals. See archives for more info.
>
> What happens is a module is distributed as a combination of open-source .c
> files and closed-source .o files. That is, it's "mixed source" - part of
> the driver is open-source and part is closed-source. What happens if the
> open-source version of the driver is the only code that uses GPL-only
> symbols. How is that handled?
>

This is the approach I would use:

Kernel module:
 Exports a standard interface like file or terminal (or several...)
 GPL all of this work.
 Make it useful for others too - and you may sell some additional HW.

Propritary code (user application):
 Uses standard file operations - like fopen, seek, ...
 The needed headers are LGPL and thus safe.

Comments?

/RogerL

-- 
Roger Larsson
Skellefteċ
Sweden
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 07 2001 - 21:00:25 EST