Re: The worst that can happen to GPLed code

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
> glibc is not a derivative work of the Linux kernel, 

Sure. In spite of things like "#include <kernel-features.h>".


>                                                     and the Linux
> kernel is not a derivative work of glibc. 

Of course.
 
>                                           Even if glibc happened to
> be linked into the kernel (which it isn't) 

What do you mean? That ring protection is the only boundary that 
the GPL can't cross?

>                                            this would only mean that
> the linked kernel as a whole would be covered by the GPL.

Well, you said that "the whole CD is a derivative work" and Moglen 
says that "the terms of the GPL and only the GPL" must cover the 
entire "work based on" [derivative work or whatever he might be
thinking of] whole you distribute. So, again, tell me please how 
does it work in the case of kernel + stuff.

regards,
alexander.