From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 27 15:23:13 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B2C37B401 for ; Tue, 27 May 2003 15:23:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (pop.gmx.net [213.165.65.60]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5B08943F93 for ; Tue, 27 May 2003 15:23:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mdcki@gmx.net) Received: (qmail 32365 invoked by uid 65534); 27 May 2003 22:23:10 -0000 Received: from cvpn018.gwdg.de (EHLO gmx.net) (134.76.22.18) by mail.gmx.net (mp007) with SMTP; 28 May 2003 00:23:10 +0200 Message-ID: <3ED3E58F.9030904@gmx.net> Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 00:24:15 +0200 From: Marcin Dalecki User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030517 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, pl, ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Leimbach References: <6855087.1054050580287.JavaMail.leimy2k@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <6855087.1054050580287.JavaMail.leimy2k@mac.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Steve Kargl Subject: Re: policy on GPL'd drivers? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 22:23:13 -0000 David Leimbach wrote: > > On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 10:40AM, Alexander Kabaev wrote: > > >>On Tue, 27 May 2003 10:32:42 -0500 >>David Leimbach wrote: >> >> >>> Ugh... the network driver portion of the nforce drivers is *not* >>> GPL'd but it >>>has a linux only and anti-reverse engineeing clause. >>> >>>Dave >> >>Then using the diver on FreeBSD will be a NVidia's license violation, >>wouldn't it? One more reason to keep it out of the tree. > > > Just the network driver... the audio driver in the tarball is still GPL'd. > > Either which way I doubt either driver will go into the tree. I don't see > any good reason to stick any of it in the kernel unless its absolutely > necessary. > > I am not a religious person when it comes to licensing. I just don't like > GPL style restrictions. Did you ever ask NVidia about they position on this? Perhaps they are more flexible then you may think and this whole discussion is simply pointless.