3 ms·

Now waitasec... I own Crappy unupdated Android one of. And the drivers use the Linux kernel. Last I checked, they need to release source for their drivers. So

Now waitasec... I own Crappy unupdated Android one of. And the drivers use the Linux kernel. Last I checked, they need to release source for their drivers. So where is it? And why can't we upstream those patches and "fix" android?

colejohnson66 9y ago
It doesn’t help that not every manufacturer (especially ones from China) don’t release the source code. And when they do, they sometimes contain opaque binary blobs that don’t tell you what is happening.
khedoros1 9y ago
Maybe they pull the stuff Nvidia does: write an interface kernel module, then have the driver itself in a library that the module loads. Since the actual driver is never part of the kernel tree...
- kuschku 9y ago
  It's much simpler. The OEM never releases the source. And courts have decided that it's not enough if you have some contributions to the kernel yourself or are a user to force them to release it, you have to have made significant contributions to force them to release it via the courts. And Torvalds and the major kernel maintainers all refuse to enforce the GPL, and actively campaign against doing so.
  - porfirium 9y ago
    Are kernel drivers subject to the GPL just because they use the Linux ABI?
    - kuschku 9y ago
      It'd be a long legal discussion to properly answer your question, but luckily OEMs make it easy for us: On most phones, there are zero external kernel modules loaded. The SoC vendor bakes it all into the ketnel, and the OEM gets the kernel as a blob. Which means all of it is subject to the GPL.
      - crankylinuxuser 9y ago
        Yep, I had to go sleep (yeah, that dreadful thing!). But this was my main area of attack. You compiled the drivers directly into the kernel. Making it all GPL. Now, as a strict reading, I have to have the device to make the request. That's not difficult. Ive phones from a lot of US named companies. I just want the rights enumerated in the GPL as granted to end users. I'm no kernel maintainer. Just a cranky person who wants the GPL enforced as any license.
        kuschku 9y ago
        > I just want the rights enumerated in the GPL as granted to end users. I'm no kernel maintainer. Just a cranky person who wants the GPL enforced as any license. Yeah, it turns out it’s not that easily enforcable. There are still court cases going on, but the current legal situation seems to be that unless you’ve contributed significant code to the kernel, you have no legal leg to stand on. Because the OEM is simply saying "yes, we violated the GPL, and infringed the copyright of the developers", but the only ones who could sue against that would be devs that contributed significant amounts of code.
  - colejohnson66 9y ago
    > And Torvalds and the major kernel maintainers all refuse to enforce the GPL, and actively campaign against doing so. Two questions: why? and why use the GPL if you’re not going to enforce it?
zaarn 9y ago
Most of the time, such a source release means "patching binary blobs into the source". The source helps little since it's just opaque garbage with little to no meaning.
pantalaimon 9y ago
> And why can't we upstream those patches and "fix" android? It's a lot of work, who is supposed to do that? Some bits of the N900 kernel are still in the process of being upstreamed afaik.

colejohnson66 9y ago

It doesn’t help that not every manufacturer (especially ones from China) don’t release the source code. And when they do, they sometimes contain opaque binary blobs that don’t tell you what is happening.

khedoros1 9y ago

Maybe they pull the stuff Nvidia does: write an interface kernel module, then have the driver itself in a library that the module loads. Since the actual driver is never part of the kernel tree...

kuschku 9y ago
It's much simpler. The OEM never releases the source. And courts have decided that it's not enough if you have some contributions to the kernel yourself or are a user to force them to release it, you have to have made significant contributions to force them to release it via the courts. And Torvalds and the major kernel maintainers all refuse to enforce the GPL, and actively campaign against doing so.
- porfirium 9y ago
  Are kernel drivers subject to the GPL just because they use the Linux ABI?
  - kuschku 9y ago
    It'd be a long legal discussion to properly answer your question, but luckily OEMs make it easy for us: On most phones, there are zero external kernel modules loaded. The SoC vendor bakes it all into the ketnel, and the OEM gets the kernel as a blob. Which means all of it is subject to the GPL.
    - crankylinuxuser 9y ago
      Yep, I had to go sleep (yeah, that dreadful thing!). But this was my main area of attack. You compiled the drivers directly into the kernel. Making it all GPL. Now, as a strict reading, I have to have the device to make the request. That's not difficult. Ive phones from a lot of US named companies. I just want the rights enumerated in the GPL as granted to end users. I'm no kernel maintainer. Just a cranky person who wants the GPL enforced as any license.
      - kuschku 9y ago
        > I just want the rights enumerated in the GPL as granted to end users. I'm no kernel maintainer. Just a cranky person who wants the GPL enforced as any license. Yeah, it turns out it’s not that easily enforcable. There are still court cases going on, but the current legal situation seems to be that unless you’ve contributed significant code to the kernel, you have no legal leg to stand on. Because the OEM is simply saying "yes, we violated the GPL, and infringed the copyright of the developers", but the only ones who could sue against that would be devs that contributed significant amounts of code.
- colejohnson66 9y ago
  > And Torvalds and the major kernel maintainers all refuse to enforce the GPL, and actively campaign against doing so. Two questions: why? and why use the GPL if you’re not going to enforce it?

zaarn 9y ago

Most of the time, such a source release means "patching binary blobs into the source". The source helps little since it's just opaque garbage with little to no meaning.

pantalaimon 9y ago

> And why can't we upstream those patches and "fix" android? It's a lot of work, who is supposed to do that? Some bits of the N900 kernel are still in the process of being upstreamed afaik.