Re: GPL issues

[Jan Engelhardt]

<obligatory_ianal_marker>

>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?
>

If vrf has no other uses besides your proprietary application, I'd shudder.

>Suppose my LKM driver adds a extra header to all outgoing packets and
>removes the extra header from the incoming packets, should this driver
>be released under GPL.? In a way it extends the functionality of
>linux, if I do release the driver code under GPL because this was
>built with linux  in mind, Should I release the application  which
>adds intelligence to interpret the extra header under GPL?
>

I don't know an answer (not even a rough one), since there is AFAICS one 
example of what you describe: the CiscoVPN kernel module. The source is 
available (so you have a chance to run it on any kernel you like), but it's 
got a typical EULA. No sign of GPL.



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