From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Jun 17 00:57:25 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id AAA11584
          for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 17 Jun 1995 00:57:25 -0700
Received: from gndrsh.aac.dev.com (gndrsh.aac.dev.com [198.145.92.241])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id AAA11577
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 17 Jun 1995 00:57:22 -0700
Received: (from rgrimes@localhost) by gndrsh.aac.dev.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id AAA06597; Sat, 17 Jun 1995 00:57:04 -0700
From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com>
Message-Id: <199506170757.AAA06597@gndrsh.aac.dev.com>
Subject: Re: GPL code in freebsd?
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 1995 00:57:04 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: iialan@iifeak.swan.ac.uk
In-Reply-To: <199506162152.XAA05538@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Jun 16, 95 11:52:06 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1854      
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> [Note: I'm Cc'ing the offender, too.]
> 
> As Bruce Evans wrote:
> > 
> > [isdn]
> > >> > The FreeBSD-Current release at the moment contains what looks very much like
> > >> > GPL code and as such is subject to the GNU public license.
> > 
> > >And we don't distribute that in binary form so we are not in violation
> > >of the GPL for that piece of code!
> > 
> > We do distribute gcc in binary form and there is apparently no problem with
> > that.
> 
> It wouldn't even a problem if we shipped a binary kernel version with
> the isdn driver, since we do also provide the source code.  Problems
> will only arise for those who intend to distribute modified binaries
> without making the modified source available.

You had better go read the GPL a few more times.  If you link GPL code
with non GPL code and distribute that, the whole needs to be under
the GPL weither you send source code or not.

That is why the GENERIC kernel does not have any GPL code linked into
it.  And why for so long we would not even allow GPL code in the
kernel source tree.  [Which given light of this recent harrasement
from the GNU folks I would just as soon go back to as a safety policy]

> Due to the currently very limited scope of the isdn driver (only
> german switch protocols, only a very limited range of hardware
> supported), this is unlikely to happen.  (And then: it's the problem
> of those who're going to distribute those binary versions.)
> 
> It's not our problem if the defenders of the GPL are unable to read
> their own license. :-)

Please go read GPL version 2.0 section 2.0B and tell me this again....
it makes the whole of the work fall under the GPL, and that is *NOT*
what we want!


-- 
Rod Grimes                                      rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com
Accurate Automation Company                   Custom computers for FreeBSD