Using GPL'd Linux drivers with non-GPL, binary-only kernel
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
In article <[email protected]>,
Jamie Lokier <[email protected]> wrote:
: I do not see any practical alternative way to create a new kind of : operating system kernel that is compatible with the wide range of PC : hardware, other than:
:
: (a) read lots of open source code and then write drivers,
: filesystems etc. from what is learned, or
: (b) just use the available code with appropriate wrapping.
:
: Both are lots of work. But isn't (b) going to be less work? I'm not : sure.
If your interest is in creating a new and unique OS, you'll likely find that it becomes a great deal of work to try to glue the linux drivers into it.
I would imagine in the majority of cases you'd either have to change the driver code considerably to fit the subtleties of <newos>, or change the <newos> code considerably to fit the subtleties of linux.
When creating a new system, the last thing you want to have to do is carry around a bunch of extra baggage that you really don't need.
Anyways, this is 2003, aren't operating systems supposed to be boring by now? And where's my flying car damnit. ;)
To answer your question more directly, I think most developers would agree that the spirit of the GPL is "give as you take". If just releasing back the source to the modified drivers - completely useless without your new closed kernel - doesn't feel a whole lot like "giving", then you're probably not doing enough to keep people happy.
Cheers - Tony 'Nicoya' Mantler :)
Signature · 2 lines
Tony "Nicoya" Mantler - Renaissance Nerd Extraordinaire - [email protected] Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada -- http://nicoya.feline.pp.se/