From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 22:55:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 22:54:51 -0400 Received: from smarty.smart.net ([207.176.80.102]:63755 "EHLO smarty.smart.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 22:54:40 -0400 From: Rick Hohensee Message-Id: <200106220305.XAA15554@smarty.smart.net> Subject: Re: Controversy over dynamic linking -- how to end the panic To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 23:05:13 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org andrew@pimlott.ne.mediaone.net (Andrew Pimlott) >I agree entirely that Linus, as creator of the license, is >privileged with respect to interpretation of the license. I Richard Stallman is the creator of the license. It's his greatest work. Linus is in no way priviledged as to interpretation of it, other than tolerance on the part of the parties that own the copyright to the license. The GPL is about "the program". As far as I'm concerned, modules are the kernel, "the program". The way to stem any panic that may exist, if you want to allow binary-only modules (which sucks*, but whatever), is to LGPL or "KGPL" the kernel. What is being allowed now is in violation of the GPL. Rick Hohensee www.clienux.com *How 'bout a nice binary-only Forth running the kernel? Metacompiling kernel routines into the Forth dictionary and such. Sound creepy? Good.