No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

3dkiwi

Wed Dec 13 20:51:43 -0800 2006

manage

If you read a little further down Linus is against this move. And I agree with his main point. The restrictions should be on the distribution of the code/music not the use of the code/music.

J

explain?

zogger

Wed Dec 13 21:51:53 -0800 2006

manage

I don't get it. How would anyone get it to use it if it wasn't distributed? Quantum psychic torrents?

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

maethorechannen

Thu Dec 14 01:52:02 -0800 2006

manage

I like what Linus wrote:

So go get it merged in the Ubuntu, (Open)SuSE and RHEL and Fedora trees 
first. This is not something where we use my tree as a way to get it to 
other trees. This is something where the push had better come from the 
other direction.

So I doubt this is ever going happen.

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

atm

Wed Dec 13 20:52:06 -0800 2006

manage

It'll be interesting to see if this forces NVidia and ATI (AMD) to open up their drivers, or if they won't care enough. NVidia also has proprietary motherboard drivers, so those would count too.

Question is, what about things like Intel's IPW2200? It has kernel code, but loads a proprietary firmware.

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

Martin Blank

Wed Dec 13 21:50:17 -0800 2006

manage

Not only does it load a proprietary, binary-only HAL, but ALL wireless drivers do this, save for a precious few reverse-engineering projects that may well be illegal in the US (among other places) and which have never gotten all that far along anyway.  According to FCC regulations, software radios cannot be allowed by the manufacturer to operate outside of specific frequencies.  This is the reason that Atheros, for example, releases its binary HAL to the MADWifi project.  To release the source code for the HAL would be risking the wrath of the FCC as well as opening up some potentially nasty consequences from a practical standpoint.

Final result: The end of real wireless support in Linux come 01 Jan 2008.

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

atrius

Wed Dec 13 23:34:12 -0800 2006

manage

I think that if this were to be done, it would mean the death of Linux of on the Desktop. I'm firmly of the belief that the Desktop, not the server, is the key to future prosperity.

I agree with Linus, the kernel is no place for zealot ideology. If someone else wants to insist that their machine only runs Free code, fine. Don't take Freedom of Choice from me. I'll take working 3-D acceleration and working wireless drivers over half busted reverse engineered drivers, or barely working ones written from scratch.

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

tclark

Thu Dec 14 09:53:14 -0800 2006

manage

I think you have it backwards.  Proprietary modules will lead to the death of Linux on the desktop.  If we don't insist on freedom, there are plenty of vendors who will be happy to take it away from us.  It will only be a matter of time before it's not possible to buy a PC that will run a free operating system.

There are enough proprietary operating systems already.  Why should Linux join them?

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

atrius

Thu Dec 14 17:54:26 -0800 2006

manage

If a person holds as a condition that all this hardware's features are available to him, then it is already not possible to buy such an item. And that isn't likely to change simply because the kernel won't load "proprietary" modules. If such a change was made Linus is right, either everything would move to user space, killing the Desktop due to poor performance, or the Nvidias and ATIs of the world would simply drop support as being too much of a pain in the rear.

We don't have the number of users to force anything on anyone. We become difficult to work with, and people will simply drop us. And I for one want all the features of my hardware working. Or not, at my choice. Not the kernel developers. Besides, not screwing with the user's right to choose does not make Linux a proprietary operating system. Should we also make a kernel modification to prevent you from running closed-source software as well? Perhaps license checks are in order as any program is started. That'll fix it!

Choice. It's the only thing that matters.

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

Jyri Sillanpaa

Fri Dec 15 09:08:48 -0800 2006

manage

The reason there are proprietary modules is mostly because of patents and licenses on the underlying technologies.
There is no way to force some hardware manufacturer to open source the their drivers since they are themselves using those proprietary modules, you would have to get the manufacturer of those modules to open their technologies first and they will not since they are making their money with those.

There will never be totally open hardware (ok if there is a worldwide monopoly producer, then yes but that is not going to happen until China has conquered solar system and even then I would doubt it).

So we have to live with it what we get and try to work around on the places we can (and judging the process we are not doing to badly :-)


Ps. you could have GNU/Linux running on totally free stuff, it just would have to be on a top of some kind of virtual machine ...

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

N. Dan Smith

Wed Dec 13 21:27:16 -0800 2006

manage

It looks like GPL-compatible licenses will be allowed.  So basically it sounds like only "free software" licensed modules will be distributed with the kernel.

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

pojo

Wed Dec 13 21:56:20 -0800 2006

manage

So basically, what this code does is if the module reports itself as having a non-compatible license with the GPL, it just refuses to load...

Linus sums it up well:

Because I think it's stupid. So use somebody else than me to push your political agendas, please. Linus

Linus points out that this will just cause driver writes to push everything into userspace. It's doable, you just take a performance hit. This patch isn't going to help *anything*. My stance is, if the vendor provided a driver that works, that's great! I'll buy their hardware! If they don't, then I won't buy their hardware!

I find it interesting that this patch is being pushed by Suse. I don't much care for anything they are doing anymore..and to think I used to want to work for them.

No more non-GPL Linux Kernel Modules after 1/1/2008

maethorechannen

Thu Dec 14 02:02:49 -0800 2006

manage

Even the guy from Suse admits it was a mistake;

Yes, as Linus points out, this is the main point here, my apologies.
GPL covers distribution, not usage, no matter how much the people
working on v3 want to change that :)

I think this is a slashdot style tempest in a teacup.

Linus tells them to go get forked

zogger

Wed Dec 13 22:02:30 -0800 2006

manage

He said he wouldn't add such a clause in his tree, because he doesn't give a rat's posterior about much of anything beyond whether a piece of code works or not, but he said others can if they want to. I guess only a lawsuit could really sort it out, started by the devs who have contributed code accepted into the kernel who say binary blobs violate the GPL.

Near as I read the thread anyway.

GPL3 fights, and the no blobs allowed fights, next year is shaping up to be fairly amusing.