Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

License issues roil Linux developer community

Filed under
Linux

Should the Linux kernel be licensed under the new version of the Gnu General Public License, or should it stick with the old version? The question has sparked a heated debate on the mailing list for Linux kernel developers. Hundreds of messages have zapped back and forth across the list debating the merits of the new open-source license, now in the final stages of preparation by the Free Software Foundation.

The copyright owner of the Linux kernel, Linus Torvalds, has stated that he would prefer to stick with the previous version of the kernel, Version 2. His chief lieutenants, Alan Cox and Andrew Morton, have sided with Torvalds. "I still think GPLv2 is simply the better license," Torvalds wrote.

Complicating the picture is that fact that Torvalds has said that if Sun Microsystems moves its open-source Solaris operating system — another version of Unix — he'd consider dual-licensing Linux so that the two projects could share code. "If we can avoid having two kernels with two different licenses and the friction that causes, I at least see the reason for GPLv3," he wrote.

Whether he could find agreement with the many coders who help write the Linux kernel is another matter.

More Here.




Law doesn't work like that

Contract law is fundamental to a functioning society and is one of the oldest parts of the law. However your analysis is overly simplistic because it doesn't acknowledge that as needs evolve, so must the law. If society decides, through the actions of the marketplace, that a new form of contract is needed, then the law will change to accommodate that and ensure that signatories uphold the contractual terms they have agreed to, so long as they are fair and reasonable.

In any event if you were right then all sorts of click-through licensing would be null and void. Yet the courts continue to uphold them.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

More in Tux Machines

today's howtos

Security Leftovers

  • Java and Python FTP attacks can punch holes through firewalls
    The Java and Python runtimes fail to properly validate FTP URLs, which can potentially allow attackers to punch holes through firewalls to access local networks. On Saturday, security researcher Alexander Klink disclosed an interesting attack where exploiting an XXE (XML External Entity) vulnerability in a Java application can be used to send emails.
  • Microsoft: no plans to patch known bugs before March [Ed: Microsoft is keeping open 'back doors' that are publicly known about, not just secret ones]
    Microsoft has no plans to issue updates for two vulnerabilities, one a zero-day and the other being one publicised by Google, before the scheduled date for its next round of updates rolls around in March. The company did not issue any updates in February, even though it had been scheduled to switch to a new system from this month onwards. It gave no reason for this, apart from saying: "This month, we discovered a last minute issue that could impact some customers and was not resolved in time for our planned updates today. "After considering all options, we made the decision to delay this month’s updates. We apologise for any inconvenience caused by this change to the existing plan." The Google-disclosed bug was made public last week, and is said to be a flaw in the Windows graphic device interface library that can be exploited both locally and remotely to read the contents of a user's memory.
  • Microsoft issues critical security patches, but leaves zero-day flaws at risk
    Microsoft has patched "critical" security vulnerabilities in its browsers, but has left at least two zero-day flaws with public exploit code. The software giant released numerous patches late on Tuesday to fix flaws in Adobe Flash for customers using Internet Explorer on Windows 8.1 and later, as well as Edge for Windows 10.

Red Hat News

  • Why upstream contributions matter when developing open source NFV solutions.
    When software is developed using open source methods, an upstream repository of the code is accessible to all members of the project. Members contribute to the code, test it, write documentation and can create a solution from that code to use or distribute under license. If an organization follows the main stream or branch of the upstream code their solution will receive all the changes and updates created in the upstream repository. Those changes simply “flow down” to the member’s solution. However, if a member organization forks the code — if they create a solution that strays from the main stream — their solution no longer receives updates, fixes and changes from the upstream repository. This organization is now solely responsible for maintaining their solution without the benefit of the upstream community, much like the baby salmon that took a tributary and then have to fend for themselves rather than remain in the main stream and receive the benefit and guidance of the other salmon making their way to the ocean.
  • HPE and Red Hat Join Forces to Give Customers Greater Choice for NFV Deployments
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise ( NYSE : HPE ) and Red Hat, Inc. ( NYSE : RHT ) announced today they are working together to accelerate the deployment of network functions virtualization (NFV) solutions based on fully open, production-ready, standards-based infrastructures. HPE plans to offer ready-to-use, pre-integrated HPE NFV System solutions and HPE Validated Configurations incorporating Red Hat OpenStack Platform and Red Hat Ceph Storage for communications service providers (CSPs).
  • Red Hat Joins the OpenPower Foundation
    As part of our commitment to delivering open technologies across many computing architectures, Red Hat has joined the OpenPOWER Foundation, an open development community based on the POWER microprocessor architecture, at the Platinum level. While we already do build and support open technologies for the POWER architecture, the OpenPOWER Foundation is committed to an open, community-driven technology-creation process – something that we feel is critical to the continued growth of open collaboration around POWER.
  • Buy, Sell or Hold? Analysts Approach: HCA Holdings, Inc. (HCA), Red Hat, Inc. (RHT)?

Linux and FOSS Events