Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Feb 2007 14:41 UTC, submitted by Oliver
FreeBSD "Linux has a large amount of device drivers for hardware not supported on FreeBSD, especially USB devices. Not rarely, such drivers have been written based on information derived by protocol sniffing, reverse engineering and the like. This makes the code highly undocumented, and renders the porting effort extremely error prone. To help with this task, I decided to start working on an emulation layer that would let us recompile the linux source code on FreeBSD, and provide a sufficiently complete emulation of the kernel APIs so that device drivers (or at least certain classes) could be used without modifications to their source code."
Thread beginning with comment 208158
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Miss-information
by Manik on Thu 1st Feb 2007 22:37 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Miss-information"
Member since:

I fail to see how your post contradict the parent. He says : If you use GPL code in your software, then your software needs to be GPL'd. You answer : Uhm, no. The other code doesn't force me to GPL my own code[...]If I don't want my code to be GPL'ed then I don't use the other code.

And if you "accidentally" use GPL'ed code in your code, and do not GPL it, you'll be sued, and will have either to remove the GPL'ed code (cease and desist), or GPL your code (I have yet to see a developper suing for reuse of his code in a GPL application).

As for the last part of your comment, I thought the goal of free software was precisely to be reused, if necessary, under the conditions mandated by the license. AFAIK, Microsoft doesn't allow any reuse of its code, so it cannot be viral.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Miss-information
by FooBarWidget on Thu 1st Feb 2007 22:47 in reply to "RE[5]: Miss-information"
FooBarWidget Member since:

- "Viral" means that I have no choice, that someone or something forces me to GPL my code even if I don't want to. Just like how a virus infects me when I don't want to be sick. That is not the case - the choice is ultimately up to me. Therefore it cannot be viral.
- Yes I can get sued, but I still have the choice to remove the GPL'ed code instead of GPLing my entire codebase.
- "Viral" has a heavily negative meaning. The GPL is not inherently negative.

Instead of calling it "viral", call it "transitive". That is a much more objective word than a flamebait-loaded word like "viral".

Edited 2007-02-01 22:54

Reply Parent Score: 1