From fca59bea770346cf1c1f9b0e00cb48a61b44a8f3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Harald Welte Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 21:00:20 +0100 Subject: import of old now defunct presentation slides svn repo --- 2007/gpl-compliance-tw2007/gpl-compliance/mgp00009.txt | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) create mode 100644 2007/gpl-compliance-tw2007/gpl-compliance/mgp00009.txt (limited to '2007/gpl-compliance-tw2007/gpl-compliance/mgp00009.txt') diff --git a/2007/gpl-compliance-tw2007/gpl-compliance/mgp00009.txt b/2007/gpl-compliance-tw2007/gpl-compliance/mgp00009.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..db45e6d --- /dev/null +++ b/2007/gpl-compliance-tw2007/gpl-compliance/mgp00009.txt @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +How to (not) use GPL Software +Derivative Works + +Binary-only kernel modules +In-kernel proprietary code (binary kernel modules) are hard to claim GPL compliant +Case-by-case analysis required, as the level of integration into the GPL licensed kernel code depends on particular case +IBM is in the process of getting rid of all binary-only kernel modules. There are exceptions, but they are very clear ones (such as a filesystem port to linux, where the filesystem code already existed under another OS) +There is no general acceptance or tolerance to binary-only kernel modules in the Linux (development) community. Not even Linus himself has ever granted an exception for such modules! + + -- cgit v1.2.3