Date: Wed, 10 May 95 12:27:32 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: peter@bonkers.taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Cc: gibbs@estienne.CS.Berkeley.EDU, rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com, brian@MediaCity.Com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: A question of downloading device drivers Message-ID: <9505101827.AA26182@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199505101048.FAA05475@bonkers.taronga.com> from "Peter da Silva" at May 10, 95 05:48:31 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > The developer. Note I did *not* say "a bad choice"... I render no > > judgment other than to note that the static inclusion of that code > > in binary form puts kernels distributed with it under obligation > > to the GPL as long as it remains GPL'ed code. For the CDROM > > distribution, this isn't a problem, but FTP code could be. > > Why on earth isn't that a problem for the CDROM distribution? > > This GPL-microcode-in-the-kernel business is *really* scary. No matter how > you distribute it you have to put the kernel under the GPL to do it. 1) It's isn't GPL; read the whole thread before resonding. ;-). 2) GPL is not a problem for a CDROM distribution that includes the source (in compliance with GPL). Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9505101827.AA26182>