From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263281AbTLDR5I (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:57:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263325AbTLDR5I (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:57:08 -0500 Received: from ezoffice.mandrakesoft.com ([212.11.15.34]:7091 "EHLO vador.mandrakesoft.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263281AbTLDR5G (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:57:06 -0500 To: "Ihar 'Philips' Filipau" Cc: Jason Kingsland , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause? X-URL: <3FCF696F.4000605@softhome.net> From: Thierry Vignaud Organization: MandrakeSoft Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 17:57:04 +0000 In-Reply-To: <3FCF696F.4000605@softhome.net> (Ihar Filipau's message of "Thu, 04 Dec 2003 18:05:51 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Ihar 'Philips' Filipau" writes: > GPL is about distribution. > > e.g. NVidia can distribute .o file (with whatever license they have > to) and nvidia.{c,h} files (even under GPL license). > Then install.sh may do on behalf of user "gcc nvidia.c blob.o -o > nvidia.ko". Resulting module are not going to be distributed - it is > already at hand of end-user. So no violation of GPL whatsoever. > > Licensing is least technical issue regarding modules. > But sure I would like to have open source drivers - at least then I > have chance to clean them up ;-))) offtopic anyway since nvidia already provide prebuild binaries for linux at http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux.html ...