4 ms·

> which should be sufficient enough to comply with GPL this is an age-old debate. Some people say that it is e.g. legal to make (redistribute to precise) a GPL

> which should be sufficient enough to comply with GPL this is an age-old debate. Some people say that it is e.g. legal to make (redistribute to precise) a GPL device driver for windows, and some argue that it is not, because the whole kernel should then be GPL. > https://linux.slashdot.org/story/02/11/05/0051225/gpl-issues-surrounding-commercial-device-drivers https://linux.slashdot.org/story/02/11/05/0051225/gpl-issues...

781 8y ago
But in Windows drivers are binary files which talk to the kernel through an API. Not much different than a binary user mode application. If binary user mode applications written in GPL are ok, then so should this.
- jcelerier 8y ago
  > Not much different than a binary user mode application. well, user-mode applications do syscalls to the kernel, not direct function calls.
  - 781 8y ago
    But the actual syscall is made by a Windows user mode library - kernel32.dll/... So your GPL user mode app calls directly into proprietary Windows library.
    - temac 8y ago
      That is specifically allowed by the GNU GPL. See "System Libraries" and adjacent paragraphs.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - nathell 8y ago
        There is a mention of "System Libraries" in GPLv3, but not GPLv2, which the Linux kernel is licensed under.
        temac 8y ago
        There are similar provisions in GPLv2.
temac 8y ago
The Linux kernel will be isolated by an hypervisor.