Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?

[David Kastrup]

kero552@gmail.com writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>> kero552@gmail.com writes:
>>
>> >> > can be not-GPL, while programs using GPL library has to be GPL.
>> >>
>> >> It depends on whether the program can work without this _specific_
>> >> library or kernel.
>> >>
>> > So... tell me about kernel I can easily switch to - without
>> > recompiling glibc AND changing source. System calls are very similar
>> > in FreeBSD and Linux, however system call 208 for example is
>> > different.
>>
>> The law does not make a significant difference between dynamic and
>> static linking, and recompiling would probably be held to the same
>> standard as long as the headers don't contain significant
>> copyrightable material.
>
>
> You didnt answer

>> (It depends on whether the program can work without this _specific_
>> library or kernel.).

> Can glibc work without linux kernel?

See <URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/ports.html>.

> Now what is difference between glibc not working w/o kernel and some
> GUI program not working w/o library.  FSF says kernel OK, program
> not.

Again: glibc does not depend on a particular kernel.  I _am_ somewhat
surprised that the current version is running on such a limited number
of platforms, though.  That had not always been the case.

You might want to check <URL:http://www.debian.org/ports/netbsd/> and
similar, I'd think that they would make use of glibc, too.

>> That does not help in itself.  Creating an artificial API does not
>> create an independent work abstraction as long as the library
>> remains the only actual implementation of that API.
>>
> I tried to point it out during OpenGl example, probably wrong way.
> There is an API (well documented) for library and there are two or
> more libraries using the API. One is GPL licensed and the rest
> not. The product doesnt have to be a GPL licensed.
>
> Personally I think this falls under "If identifiable sections of that
> work are not derived from the Program,.." text from section 2, but
> anyway:
> True/False?

Uh what?

> Actually what I said here few post back was that there is no technical
> difference between calling syscall and library.
> Function problem is same in both cases: glibc wont work w/o kernel and
> program w/o library. You say the difference is that kernel is
> implementing standard API (POSIX and SYSTEM V.. not really sure), while
> library is using some API intended only for this library.
> Correct?

Depends on library in question, system call in question and other
stuff.  If a system call is used for manipulating a Linux-specific
in-kernel data structure, things might possibly be viewed differently.
However, the kernel license NOTE would make it hard for Linus to press
this in court without getting an estoppel defense.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum