From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pa0-f49.google.com ([209.85.220.49]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1TipCD-000490-1h for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 16:30:09 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id bi1so705179pad.36 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 08:30:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 08:30:00 -0800 From: Greg KH To: richard -rw- weinberger Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] ubi: Add ubiblock read-write driver Message-ID: <20121212163000.GA4848@kroah.com> References: <1355314912-9321-1-git-send-email-elezegarcia@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Ezequiel Garcia , Artem Bityutskiy , Michael Opdenacker , Ezequiel Garcia , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Tim Bird , Gregory CLEMENT List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 05:14:41PM +0100, richard -rw- weinberger wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Gregory CLEMENT wrote: > > 2012/12/12 richard -rw- weinberger : > >> Hi! > >> > >> A few comments... > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/ubiblock.c > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,830 @@ > >>> +/* > >>> + * Copyright (c) 2012 Ezequiel Garcia > >>> + * Copyright (c) 2011 Free Electrons > >>> + * > >>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify > >>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by > >>> + * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or > >>> + * (at your option) any later version. > >> > >> Linux is GPLv2 and not v2 or any later version... > > > > I think it is more complicate than this. > > In the kernel you have code under GPLv2, GPLv2+ and even BSD licenses. > > All these licenses are compatible but if you want to distribute all the sources > > of the kernel then you are under the more restrictive license: GPLv2. > > So we can say that kernel is GPLv2, but it doesn't prevent to submit code > > under GPLv2+. > > The kernel is GPLv2. period. The overall kernel is, yes, but individual files can also have additional licenses on them. > > There seems to have a couple of files under GPLv2: > > git grep "(at your option) any later version" | wc -l > > 6800 > > These lines are wrong. Not true at all, please consult a lawyer if you are unsure. greg k-h