* Linux Kernel and GPL section 2c
@ 2003-12-08 18:14 Kendrick Hamilton
2003-12-08 18:43 ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kendrick Hamilton @ 2003-12-08 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Hello all,
I noticed the discussion about linux kernel modules that happened
last week. I was wondering about something with regards to the linux
kernel and Section 2c of the GPL. Why doesn't the kernel on booting
print something about the kernel being free software licensed under the
GPL, and shouldn't it?
please CC responses to hamilton@sedsystems.ca
Kendrick Hamilton
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: Linux Kernel and GPL section 2c
2003-12-08 18:14 Linux Kernel and GPL section 2c Kendrick Hamilton
@ 2003-12-08 18:43 ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2003-12-10 0:16 ` Pavel Machek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard @ 2003-12-08 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: Kendrick Hamilton
Kendrick Hamilton <hamilton@sedsystems.ca> writes:
> Hello all,
> I noticed the discussion about linux kernel modules that happened last
> week. I was wondering about something with regards to the linux kernel and
> Section 2c of the GPL. Why doesn't the kernel on booting print something
> about the kernel being free software licensed under the GPL, and shouldn't
> it?
Presumably, 1) the kernel as a whole is not a "modified" work, but
rather at least parts of it are the original work, 2) it does not read
commands interactively when run, 3) it does not normally print such
announcements.
--
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux Kernel and GPL section 2c
2003-12-08 18:43 ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
@ 2003-12-10 0:16 ` Pavel Machek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2003-12-10 0:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard; +Cc: linux-kernel, Kendrick Hamilton
Hi!
> > Hello all,
> > I noticed the discussion about linux kernel modules that happened last
> > week. I was wondering about something with regards to the linux kernel and
> > Section 2c of the GPL. Why doesn't the kernel on booting print something
> > about the kernel being free software licensed under the GPL, and shouldn't
> > it?
>
> Presumably, 1) the kernel as a whole is not a "modified" work, but
> rather at least parts of it are the original work, 2) it does not read
> commands interactively when run, 3) it does not normally print such
> announcements.
I see such announcements. I think we should just kill them all:
Installing knfsd (copyright (C) 1996 okir@monad.swb.de).
CSLIP: code copyright 1989 Regents of the University of California.
Linux agpgart interface v0.100 (c) Dave Jones
ip_tables: (C) 2000-2002 Netfilter core team
Or perhaps we can replace 'POSIX conformance testing by UNIFIX' with
'Distribute under GPLv2'?
Pavel
--
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-12-10 0:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-12-08 18:14 Linux Kernel and GPL section 2c Kendrick Hamilton
2003-12-08 18:43 ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2003-12-10 0:16 ` Pavel Machek
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).