From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751055AbWDLJW1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2006 05:22:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751085AbWDLJW1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2006 05:22:27 -0400 Received: from mxfep01.bredband.com ([195.54.107.70]:50315 "EHLO mxfep01.bredband.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751055AbWDLJW0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2006 05:22:26 -0400 Message-ID: <443CC6CE.6070102@stesmi.com> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 11:22:22 +0200 From: Stefan Smietanowski User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Engelhardt CC: Pramod Srinivasan , David Weinehall , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: GPL issues References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.0.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-ripemd160; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig1DDD756BE977F9D9675AD27B" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig1DDD756BE977F9D9675AD27B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > >>Suppose I use the linux-vrf patch for the kernel that is freely >>available and use the extended setsocket options such as SO_VRF in an >>application, do I have to release my application under GPL since I am >>using a facility in the kernel that a standard linux kernel does not >>provide? >> > > > If vrf has no other uses besides your proprietary application, I'd shudder. So in order for you not to shudder the vrf people have to write a GPL'd program or convince someone else to write one? That sounds .. really odd. Or more to the point, someone ONLY writes kernelmode stuff, doesn't touch userspace at all. A proprietary app shows up that uses it, and all of a sudden this guy's kernelmode whatever is disliked cause noone wrote any GPL'd program for it? That's almost forcing the person who wrote the kernel part to write a GPL'd program JUST because there is a proprietary program using his stuff - and THAT is insane. // Stefan --------------enig1DDD756BE977F9D9675AD27B Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEPMbRBrn2kJu9P78RA45jAJ4oFMo6dasmx7Ctjm8FVOJkn0RDsgCgne2C D2Ml+edXNb5usgGW/DnVMHU= =5I43 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig1DDD756BE977F9D9675AD27B--