LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To: <khc@pm.waw.pl>
Cc: <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
	"Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <acme@ghostprotocols.net>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Alan Cox" <alan@redhat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 - fix mcount GPL bogosity.
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:19:42 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKKEONKKAC.davids@webmaster.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3d4qj90zm.fsf@maximus.localdomain>


> "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> writes:

> > I don't know who told you that or why, but it's obvious nonsense,

> Correct.

> > Exports should be marked GPL if and only if they cannot be used
> > except in a derivative work. If it is possible to use them
> > without taking
> > sufficient protectable expression, they should not be marked GPL.

> This isn't very obvious to me.

It may not be obvious, but it is the design and purpose of marking exports
GPL.

> The licence doesn't talk about GPL or non-GPL exports. It doesn't
> restrict the use, only distribution of the software. One is free to
> remove _GPL from the code and distribute it anyway (except perhaps for
> some DMCA nonsense).

That's true. The DMCA doesn't prevent it, since marking symbols is *not* a
license enforcement mechanism.

> If a code is a derivative work it has to be distributed (use is not
> restricted) under GPL, EXPORT _GPL or not _GPL.

Of course.

> One may say _GPL is a strong indication that all users are
> automatically a derivative works, but it's only that - indication. It
> doesn't mean they are really derivative works and it doesn't mean a
> module not using any _GPL exports isn't a derivative.

Of course. (The only people who argue otherwise are the 'linking makes a
derivative work' idiots.)

> I think introducing these _GPL symbols was a mistake in the first place.

Perhaps, since people seem to be trying to refight the same battles again.

The agreement made when the feature was added was that EXPORT_GPL was not a
license enforcement mechanism but was an indication that someone believed
that any use of the symbol was possible only a derivative work that would
need to be distributed under the GPL.

> Actually I think the _GPL exports are really harmful - somebody
> distributing a binary module may claim he/she doesn't violate the GPL
> because the module uses only non-GPL exports.

Anyone can argue anything. That would be an obviously stupid argument.
Perhaps clearer documentation might be helpful, but the GPL speaks for
itself.

> OTOH GPL symbols give
> _us_ exactly nothing.

They serve as a warning and, as a practical matter, may make it a bit more
difficult to violate the license.

DS



  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-02-26 18:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-02-25 17:59 Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-02-25 18:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-02-25 18:19   ` Alan Cox
2008-02-25 19:27     ` Adrian Bunk
2008-02-25 19:48       ` Alan Cox
2008-02-25 20:09         ` Adrian Bunk
2008-02-25 20:38           ` Alan Cox
2008-02-25 21:17       ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-02-26  1:30   ` David Schwartz
2008-02-26 12:29     ` Alan Cox
2008-02-26 15:43     ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-02-26 17:04       ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-02-26 17:21         ` Alan Cox
2008-02-26 17:44           ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-02-26 18:04             ` Alan Cox
2008-02-26 18:19       ` David Schwartz [this message]
2008-02-26 23:13         ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-02-26 23:35           ` David Schwartz
2008-02-27  0:05             ` Krzysztof Halasa
2008-02-27  0:28               ` David Schwartz
2008-02-27 10:31           ` Alan Cox
2008-02-27 10:55             ` Krzysztof Halasa

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKKEONKKAC.davids@webmaster.com \
    --to=davids@webmaster.com \
    --cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
    --cc=acme@ghostprotocols.net \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alan@redhat.com \
    --cc=khc@pm.waw.pl \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --subject='RE: [PATCH] 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 - fix mcount GPL bogosity.' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).