View Single Post
Old 07-27-06, 03:46 AM   #17
Robster
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 40
Default Re: Opinions on driver license

Quote:
Originally Posted by golding
Does it 'call' the kernel api or just add function to the open parts via software? I can 'read' the source for the module code, do is this actually a GPL violation or not?

The problem, as I see it, is that nobody at nVidia has actually come out and ratified what PRECISELY happens when you compile the module.
Well, you can read the source and the compiling instructions, which should tell you PRECISELY what happens. That is, if you can read that stuff

It's a grey area that has people drawing battle lines all over the place. From my understanding, using (open-source) glue to stick a binary module to the kernel is a GPL violation, but I'm OK because *I* compile the glue code and create the final kernel, and I don't distribute the end result to anyone. Distros that ship pre-compiled modules to users would be actually in violation.

Morally? Who knows... I'm not in charge of anyone's conscience but my own

In the end though, I support nVidia's position of keeping their code under wraps, and if the kernel were modified to make it *technically* difficult to link nVidia's binary driver, I'd hack the kernel to remove that obstruction.
Robster is offline   Reply With Quote