On Sunday, May 25, 2008 9:37 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 09:40:32AM +0100, James Chapman wrote: >> >> Is the optional "library" proprietary (binary only)? If so, think >> carefully about GPL implications. Adding a simple GPL driver to expose >> proprietary hooks isn't good... > Yes, that was exactly the idea. > It's not only, "not good", it's flat out illegal and violates the > license of the kernel. Do not do this at all if you are thinking you > can keep something from being released under the GPL. > I thought there was a legal way of doing it as described here: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs > thanks, > > greg k-h
