Date: Wed, 10 May 1995 05:48:31 -0500 (CDT) From: Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com> To: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) 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: <199505101048.FAA05475@bonkers.taronga.com> In-Reply-To: <9505100207.AA20621@cs.weber.edu> from "Terry Lambert" at May 9, 95 08:07:42 pm
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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199505101048.FAA05475>