[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?
From: |
kero552 |
Subject: |
Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2? |
Date: |
7 Oct 2006 13:25:02 -0700 |
User-agent: |
G2/1.0 |
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> Just so you understand my curiosity: replace
> Gstreamer with glibc
> Totem with Linux kernel
>
> Linux allows binary modules, Totem does not. The replacment is not
> correct.
>
I never said a thing about modules. Not even once.
> Sorenson with Adobe reader.
>
> I wanted to understand a simple problem and got into a deep
> swamp. No more.
>
> It is quite simple, if you link, then it is considered derivate. Just
> "talking" to the program in question is not considered deriviate,
> glibc simply talks to Linux, it doesn't link to it. Much like you can
> have non-free scripts for Bash, which is licensed under the GNU GPL,
> the scripts mearly "talk" to bash, they share no data with bash.
>
> The problem you are experiencing is that you are mixing two works, one
> with a small clarification of what is considered deriviate.
Define link.
I don't see any difference between
* "talk to Linux through syscalls"
* "using dlopen, dlsym and all this stuff" in both cases I dont require
compier to do anything, but there is a way to ask GPL code to do your
stuff. Quite a simillar.
I think that you can use GPL through linking. Why? because kernel does
it and I dont see difference between two lines above.
There are four way to get out of this loop
* I will give up
* there are subtle differences I can not understand -> I am hostage
of layers
* you can comunicate between all GPL and non-GPL programs freely
without license change
* whatever in any way possible use GPL code is GPL ( the worst
possibility - GPL hegemonia Linux)
Another stupid example:
I will make library A. I will publish it under GPL.
I will take library A and publish it with GPL and small notice above it
(just like linus did ) calling this function through dlopen and dlsym
and dlclose is not considered
Now I have two libraries with GPL license and same source, but one can
be linked to another source, even closed one, while other cant.
I see some others examples and it is really bother me.
Honza
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, (continued)
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/07
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/07
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, kero552, 2006/10/07
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/07
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, David Kastrup, 2006/10/07
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/07
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, kero552, 2006/10/07
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/10/07
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/07
- Message not available
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/07
- Message not available
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?,
kero552 <=
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/10/07
- Message not available
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, kero552, 2006/10/07
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/10/07
- Message not available
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/09
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/10/09
- Message not available
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/09
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/10/09
- Message not available
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/09
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/10/09
- Message not available
- Re: Can linux kernel claim it uses GPL v2?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/09