Re: feature request - why not make netif_rx() a pointer?

["David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>]

On Thu, 2002-10-24 at 06:30, Slavcho Nikolov wrote:
> In other words, the new routine will not be a derivative of the old one
> or some other part of the kernel.
> Instead, I'll create my own (cleanroom) handler that doesn't reuse any
> existing code, which in the end will either pass control to the GPL routine
> being replaced or destroy the parameters and return.
> I can't see how that is a violation of GPL. If it is, then hundreds of
> Linux startups had better go bankrupt now instead of fighting losing 
> legal battles later.

Let me give you an example of what would be illegal.

Using this netif_rx() hook to implement a proprietary TCP stack
to replace the GPL'd one in the kernel right now.  And that is exactly
the reason I want any such netif_rx  function pointer crap to be
EXPORT_GPL

And before someone, I forget who it was, barks again, EXPORT_GPL has
no legal significance, it is merely an annotation.  Whether a symbol
is marked this way or not has no consequence on legal matters.