On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 11:23:30AM -0700, W. Wayne Liauh wrote: > CDDL (or more specifically, a code licensed under the CDDL) can be considered > as consisting of two portions: the GPL portion and the proprietary portion. > If enough manpower (gender neutral) can be mustered to eliminate the need for > the proprietary code, then Sun can easily re-license OpenSolaris under GPL. > > But doing that would also defeat what I believe as perhaps the best advantage > of CDDL, in that it allows hardware manufacturers to have their proprietary > driver included in the kernel. So far, unfortunately, I am not sensing any > action to educate hardware makers of this advantage.
Bah, most people keep proprietary code in linux kernel modules, and this is mostly ok and accepted. After all the kernel-module interface provides an as good code separation as the kenrel-userland interface does, at least if said modules do not use GPLed callbacks in the kernel, but they usually don't need to. Friendly, Sven Luther _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
