Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Mar 2006 23:07 UTC, submitted by Tako Lansbergen
BeOS & Derivatives Studio33 has released part II [part I] in its series of articles looking at the current state of Haiku. "In the previous part I talked about the achievements of the Haiku Team since the project was first started, this time I will go deeper into the work that has been done lately and which parts need serious attention in the coming months." Screenshots o'plenty, boys and girls.
Thread beginning with comment 106392
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6b]: Re: Kernel, etc
by JohnMG on Tue 21st Mar 2006 18:08 UTC
Member since:

axeld wrote:
> IOW even if shipping a kernel with GPL drivers makes
> the kernel GPL (in case of GPL v2, this is a possible
> understanding), this wouldn't be a problem; ongoing
> development would still be put under the MIT license,
> of course.

Hmm... that sounds like you're getting into pretty shaky ground there. Either you're licensing your code MIT or you're licensing it GPLv2. It will look pretty bad if you distribute Haiku with the MIT license, but with GPLv2 drivers thus being in violation of their license, while maybe saying on a mailing list, "sure, it's GPLv2 then, fine.".

Reply Score: 1

RE[6b]: Re: Kernel, etc
by rayiner on Tue 21st Mar 2006 18:24 in reply to "RE[6b]: Re: Kernel, etc"
rayiner Member since:

The Haiku code is licensed MIT. The drivers are licensed GPLv2. They are separate works. Now, the derived work of the drivers linked to the kernel is GPL'ed (meaning that a statically-compiled kernel binary must be distributed under the GPL), but the original MIT source code can still be distributed under MIT.

As far as I can see, there is nothing wrong with this setup, since the MIT license is GPL-compatible. FreeBSD does the same thing too, btw. They have GPL'ed code in the tree, but isolate it so if you want a fully BSD-licensed source tree (for whatever reason), you can still get at it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6b]: Re: Kernel, etc
by umccullough on Tue 21st Mar 2006 20:45 in reply to "RE[6b]: Re: Kernel, etc"
umccullough Member since:

What axeld was stating was only that there were GPL drivers in the source tree. They are not "distributed" with Haiku by default.

When building Haiku, a developer must specify when running ./configure that they want to "include gpl addons" if they want them built with the OS. This means that a default distro of Haiku would not contain the GPL drivers and would therefore be distributed under the MIT license.

Since the MIT/BSD license is GPL compatible, someone distributing Haiku with the GPL addons can distribute the rest of the OS under that license as well and provide all source code as required by such.

Furthermore, drivers in BeOS/Haiku don't necessarily need to be compiled into the kernel as they are in Linux - so someone building a driver for Haiku using GPL code would not be including their source as part of the kernel per-se. The drivers can be copy/pasted to the kernel's add-ons directory where the kernel would have them loaded during bootup to see if they apply to any hardware. As such, I'm not sure that GPL drivers for Haiku would require the rest of the OS to be GPL'd.

Edited 2006-03-21 20:50

Reply Parent Score: 3