On 09/16/2016 02:45 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> And then there's the question of whether excluding things from the >>> build, but having them present in the sources actually helps. >> The main reason for this whole relicensing debacle is to prevent non-GPL >> binaries from linking against GPL objects, and this patch allows us to >> do that. Yes, there will be be two non-LGPL files (dsdt.asl amd >> mk_dsdt.c, which I will revert back to GPL) in an otherwise LGPL >> directory but that's an in-convenience and not a license violation. > Well, if linking is all this is about, then it's fine of course. I'm just > not a license expert, so we'd need this acked by someone who is > more familiar with the differences and implications.
I think Ian and Lars (added both here) would be the most experienced in this matter. I could move these two files into tools/libacpi/gpl subdirectory to emphasize their special licensing. -boris _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
