> This is the module tag ... it says what licence the module is under,
> not the licence for the module combined with the kernel, which is
> always GPLv2 because the stricter licence rules.
Because if I build a BSD licensed module against the kernel, give you
the binaries and refuse to give you t
On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 21:51 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2016 7:09 PM, "James Bottomley" <
> james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 15:24 +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> > > > table development go under copyleft-next, Rusty recently asked
> >
On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 21:15 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > This is the module tag ... it says what licence the module is
> > under, not the licence for the module combined with the kernel,
> > which is always GPLv2 because the stricter licence rules.
>
> Because if I build a BSD licensed module agai
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 21:15:06 +0100
Alan Cox wrote:
> > This is the module tag ... it says what licence the module is under,
> > not the licence for the module combined with the kernel, which is
> > always GPLv2 because the stricter licence rules.
>
> Because if I build a BSD licensed module ag
On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 09:09:07AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 15:24 +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> > > table development go under copyleft-next, Rusty recently asked for
> > > code to go in prior to the license tag being added denoting this
> > > license as GPL-com
On Aug 9, 2016 7:09 PM, "James Bottomley" <
james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 15:24 +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> > > table development go under copyleft-next, Rusty recently asked for
> > > code to go in prior to the license tag being added denoting this
On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 03:24:29PM +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> However you need to clarify the licence first I think. Linux is GPLv2,
> your document only allows use of GPL with "GPL" works - not GPL v2 works ?
The license defines "GPL" as "a version of the GNU General Public
License or th
On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 03:24:29PM +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> It would also be good if someone clarified whether 6 and 7 are intended
> to combine so you can take contributed patches and put them in your own
> proprietary version. As a non-lawyer the intent is not clear at all.
6 and 7 ar
On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 15:24 +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> > table development go under copyleft-next, Rusty recently asked for
> > code to go in prior to the license tag being added denoting this
> > license as GPL-compatible [3] -- I had noted in the patch
> > submission which annotated c
> table development go under copyleft-next, Rusty recently asked for code
> to go in prior to the license tag being added denoting this license as
> GPL-compatible [3] -- I had noted in the patch submission which annotated
> copyleft-next's compatibility to GPLv2 that copyleft-next is the license
>
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:32:29PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:24:34 -0700
> "Luis R. Rodriguez" wrote:
>
> > This RFC v3 builds off the last RFC v2 series [0] for adding linker tables.
> > The largest amount of work here was to take Russell King's feedba
On 07/25/2016 09:32 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know really it is compatible with GPLv2,
> and if it is, I'm not sure the reason why we need another license.
> AFAICS the license terms, most of parts looks reasonable. I just concern
> clause 8, after fifteen years, i
Hi Luis,
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:24:34 -0700
"Luis R. Rodriguez" wrote:
> This RFC v3 builds off the last RFC v2 series [0] for adding linker tables.
> The largest amount of work here was to take Russell King's feedback on
> using linker table for kprobes text not being appropriate -- and providi
This RFC v3 builds off the last RFC v2 series [0] for adding linker tables.
The largest amount of work here was to take Russell King's feedback on
using linker table for kprobes text not being appropriate -- and providing
another lightweight API for simple section ranges: read-only stitched pieces
14 matches
Mail list logo
