Re: GPLONLY kernel symbols???

M. R. Brown
2001-10-18T13:32:58Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 659 bytes --]

* pierre@lineo.com <pierre@lineo.com> on Wed, Oct 17, 2001:

>
> I can make a kernel driver that compiles statically
> and also uses a non-GPL library, even in the form of
> a binary .o file, and the "tainted" mechanism as it
> is today will miss it entirely.
>

Statically into the kernel? I don't think so. First off, if your "static"
code isn't GPL'd you can't distribute the resultant kernel since you've
violated the GPL. The tainted mechanism was designed for proprietary
and/or binary-only modules without a supported license. The case you
mention above can't even exist (at least, not in any publically-accessible
code).

M. R.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]