Re: Linux Kernel lincenses and binary modules
On 12 Jun 2002, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> > who's arguing)? What is Debian's official position in this regard?
>
> AFAIR Linus stated at least two thighs that differ real kernel license
> from "standard" GPL (as if there could be any non-standard GPL ;-) :
> 1. Binary modules are *OK*
> 2. Linux kernel is licensed ONLY under GPL v2, not any later or
> previous.
>
> Both statments (if they're treated as official and powerful - they
> were such AFAIR) alter original GPL2.
>
> So there's no problem because Linux kernel is not really under GPL2 ;-)
That was my interpretation, since Linus does hold at least a majority of
the copyright. But again, the question was the implications on the Debian
Social Contract, and Debian's official position.
> BTW: Do you want to start another flame war? don't you? 8)
No flame war intended. However, I do think this is a crucial question, as
many use Debian because of its social contract, including FSF and GNU
project members.
David
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: