Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 6th Aug 2006 17:30 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source Plenty of loud argument has ensued over whether binary-only drivers belong in an operating system based on open source philosophies. David Chisnall examines the reasoning on both sides.
Thread beginning with comment 149630
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Sodki
Member since:
2005-11-10

And, if proprietary driver is wrapped into an open source(GPL) code that access the other parts of the kernel ?

That's how the nVidia proprietary drivers works and it's totally legit.

Reply Parent Score: 2

anonymousbrowser Member since:
2006-04-28

No, it isn't, even if the wrapper were LGPL'd it would, IIRC, be swallowed up and turned GPL when linked into the kernel at runtime, your GPL wrapper can't link to a non-GPL compatible module.

Reply Parent Score: 2

fffffh Member since:
2006-01-04

Wrapper code and and binary driver are owned by the same developer/company.
He/she can't sue himself.
BlueCat/Montavista doesn't seem to provide the full kernel source code of their own Linux distributions.

Edited 2006-08-06 23:43

Reply Parent Score: 1

Sodki Member since:
2005-11-10

No, it isn't, even if the wrapper were LGPL'd it would, IIRC, be swallowed up and turned GPL when linked into the kernel at runtime, your GPL wrapper can't link to a non-GPL compatible module.

The nVidia wrapper is under GPL. The wrapper doesn't link to the binary driver, it loads it dinamically, so it's OK.

Reply Parent Score: 2