From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 15:42:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 15:42:49 -0400 Received: from relay-1v.club-internet.fr ([194.158.96.112]:17033 "HELO relay-1v.club-internet.fr") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 15:42:34 -0400 Message-ID: <3BB4D327.61902593@club-internet.fr> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 21:44:39 +0200 From: Daniel Caujolle-Bert Reply-To: segfault@club-internet.fr X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.9 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox Cc: arjanv@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Binary only module overview In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: > > > That I would call an obvious GPL violation... no discussion > > about vague "interfaces", if you directly link serial.c > > (even modified) into a non-GPL .o file that's obvious.... > > I raised this one with Ted T'so (who wrote the serial.c they use) a long > time ago. Ted seemed happy for this to occur - and its kind of his code, > his business. I don't understand you here, sorry, complicated sentence are hard for me :<. Anyway, i am one of the one who hacked and old version of this driver for 2.4.7+, of course i can understand it's a GPL violation, but like another guy wrote (sorry, i haven't his name liying around), binary only module is *almost* better than no support. Cheers. -- 73's de Daniel, F1RMB. -=- Daniel Caujolle-Bert -=- segfault@club-internet.fr -=- -=- f1rmb@f1rmb.ampr.org (AMPR NET) -=-