On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 01:30:17PM -0700, Nathan Anderson wrote: > On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 11:53 AM, Greg KH <mailto:greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This is an almost impossible task, given that you have no idea what > > patches were applied to the system, or how anything was built. > > I understand this sentiment; I really do. However... > > > But, as you have the system, you have the right to ask for the source > > code, and the configuration file that built the code, under the license > > of the kernel from the company that gave you the device. > > ...although this is certainly true as far as the kernel source goes, I'm not > sure that the same iron-clad case could be made for the .config, and having > had some dealings with this company in the past, I have my doubts that they > would surrender the details of their complete build environment to me. > > I'll give it a try, but I would not be surprised if they claimed that it was > "debatable" whether the GPL required them to give up the .config, and then > came down on the opposite side of the debate. See section 3 of the GPLv2: The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. The .config for the kernel falls in the "associated interface definition files" from what I have been told by lawyers in the past. best of luck, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
