On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Cort Dougan wrote:
> } This can be made clean if all the inlined C in the headers are pushed
> } back to an actual .c file and the make it function to call as an extern.
> } So the solution is to make a patch and publish that patch which cleans the
> } out the C code in question and move the associacted GPL license to the new
> } .c files. This is proper and legal as structs are just the glue or api.
> }
> } So if I publish this patch where it can be freely available for usage by
> } all, I comply with GPL. This also removes any of the "extremists" points
> } of the smallest amount of GPL code invoked by the compiler can not touch
> } pure code.
> }
> } Any arguments why this will not work?
>
> Maybe something else would be better. Adding -fno-inline to the build
> might be more useful. It makes things a bit cleaner.
>
> It's a nasty mess to have to do this for every subsystem when someone gets
> a wild-hair and starts inline-ing things without thinking.
Well since there is a fork for everything else, how about a
business-linux-2.{4,5} fork?
As a place to make it even harder for the extremist to whine and cry over
the usages of binary only modules.
Comments?
Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group
-
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 : Sat Nov 23 2002 - 22:00:33 EST