Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-11-20 at 19:55, Andre Hedrick wrote:
>
> >So " -fno-inline " should be enough to squelch the extremists?
>
>
> Its not relevant to the discussion even.
That's $topic AFAICS. Some armchair lawyers are alleging that
#include'ing GPL'd kernel code into non-GPL'd binary kernel module makes
that module a derivative work and thus must be GPL'd itself.
Have we decided that #include'ing GPL'd code does, or does not, taint
otherwise "license-clean" code that includes the GPL'd code?
The only thing I've seen from Linus is him mentioning that this is a
"grey area". Given this message:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=103487469728730&w=2
we fall to copyright law, and wonder aloud if an obviously-non-derived
work #includes GPL'd code, does it become derived?
Jeff
-
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