From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,3ec90d7920bdc8e8 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada and licensing References: <1190014387.975202.55530@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com> <1190028836.075969.233300@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1190095844.877071@xnews001> <1190099942.631460@xnews001> From: Markus E L Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:33:28 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG) Cancel-Lock: sha1:whzNWYqdkyFxcKamNk+EHnUvByY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.74.50.232 X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1190122120 88.74.50.232 (18 Sep 2007 15:28:40 +0200) X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:2031 Date: 2007-09-18T15:33:28+02:00 List-Id: Dirk Heinrichs wrote: > Dirk Heinrichs wrote: > >>> A warning is in order here: Anon has a really skewed realitionship to >>> the GPL, so w/o checking I wouldn't even trust statements like "There >>> is a movement to have GPL license module only in Linux". Frictions >>> between the kernel license and "closed" modules have existed for a >>> long time and the GPL-only philosophy endorsed by Linux Torvalds and >>> others has been circumvented by external loaders for binary modules >>> etc. I wonder to which event in 2008 anon is alluding (is there really >>> a new development?). >> >> I'm not sure about this either, but Greg K-H is pushing this since a long >> time, maybe he just succeeded. > > A short search revealed that Linus has refused to let it happen: > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/475824 > > So no, there won't be any problem for proprietary kernel modules in 2008. Ah, see, there ..., what did I say? :-) Thanks for the ref. Regards -- Markus