2006/9/16, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
So the obvious questions is why debian can have the nvidia drivers, but suse can't, where is the different ... or Debian is actually braking the GPL ( fsf know about this ? )
Is there a difference is you have non-free kernel modules for olders release ?? isn't the presence of the module it self in the server the problem ?
Any way, see the smartlink in suse "extra"
http://mirrors.kernel.org/suse/i386/10.1/inst-source-extra/suse/i586/
Sure, i just put the link like a reference to what i said before. What i said is the kororaa problem was with the "live cd", but they never remove the nvidia/ati drivers from the server and no body ask for either.
Marcel Mourguiart wrote:
> Is clear that GPL is protected by law in Germany and USA, is clear too (
> for me at least ) that you can't mix or link non-free software with GPL
> code ( with lgpl you can ).
>
> What i think is not clear is the server=distribution, for example when
> kororaa receive a letter from fsf, they ask to kororaa specifically remove
> the nvidia and ati driver _from the live cd_, wich they do. BUT they never
> have ask to remove nvidia / ati drivers from gentoo servers ( kororaa
> depository ), not a single letter, just nothing.
Seems to be an oversight.
> Debian project have a big non-free section in the server, i have never
> see a letter from fsf asking to remove it because they are
> braking the GPL.
As long as the non-free software doesn't include GPL code, there is no
problem.
So the obvious questions is why debian can have the nvidia drivers, but suse can't, where is the different ... or Debian is actually braking the GPL ( fsf know about this ? )
> Almost every big distro ( including suse ) have some non-free kernel
> modules in the server, i have never see fsf asking to remove
> those files.
Since SUSE Linux 10.1 this problem is fixed. I couldn't find any non-free
kernel modules for SUSE Linux 10.1 or later on any of the SUSE servers.
If you can find such modules, this would be a bug.
Is there a difference is you have non-free kernel modules for olders release ?? isn't the presence of the module it self in the server the problem ?
Any way, see the smartlink in suse "extra"
http://mirrors.kernel.org/suse/i386/10.1/inst-source-extra/suse/i586/
> Ok, they have time/money to make a sue, but they have not the time to write
> a letter ??
>
> you can read the kororaa issue here:
> http://kororaa.org/index.php?entry=entry060521-200059
I know about that opinion piece. Rest assured that it is not possible
to compile a Linux kernel module without including headers (and code)
from the Linux kernel sources. That alone means that you cannot
distribute binary only kernel modules. However, if you do so AND
if you can prove that some of your code are not a derived work of
the Linux kernel, a court may decide you don't have to opensource
all of your code. However, that won't help you much if you're not
allowed to distribute the modules.
Sure, i just put the link like a reference to what i said before. What i said is the kororaa problem was with the "live cd", but they never remove the nvidia/ati drivers from the server and no body ask for either.
--
Marcel Mourguiart
