Re: MODULE_LICENSE(): "GPL" vs. "GPL v2" (Was: [PATCH 1/2] Input: add support for Semtech SX8654 I2C touchscreen controller)

[Rusty Russell]

Paul Bolle <pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> [Added Rusty and Dave.]
>
> On Sat, 2015-03-07 at 20:51 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 07, 2015 at 11:38:55PM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> > From a technological standpoint it would be easy to declare "GPL" (or
>> > any other string) to mean "GPL v2 compatible", which is, I think, all
>> > that matters. But license_is_gpl_compatible() doesn't do that. And I
>> > fear that's for a reason. Is my fear unfounded?
>> 
>> Well we might ask Rusty on the off chance that he remembers but my guess
>> would be that he added "GPL v2" in addition to "GPL" and other license
>> stings because at the time there was one driver,
>> drivers/net/tulip/xircom_tulip_cb.c, that used MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2").

Yes, people screw this up.  But that's mainly because they don't care
either :)

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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/