Sponsored link
Serve your customers, not your servers, with VERIO Linux VPS. Full-access test-drive here.
| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
Misunderstanding of embedded system designers
Misunderstanding of embedded system designers
Posted Jan 16, 2006 23:27 UTC (Mon) by karim (subscriber, #114)In reply to: Misunderstanding of embedded system designers by bk
Parent article: GPLv3: a first look
My publishing credits weren't meant to convince you of my viewpoint.
Rather, it was meant to demonstrate that there can be other reasons
for voicing an opinion that those you hinted at.
And no, you're right, I did not react with a cold head. It just
really gets to me when I see the kind of "us-vs-them" attitude. We
all have a responsibility for the greater good and we all have the
duty -- at least that's my belief -- to make an effort in
understanding others' viewpoints.
Karim
(Log in to post comments)
Misunderstanding of embedded system designers
Posted Jan 17, 2006 0:55 UTC (Tue) by cventers (subscriber, #31465) [Link]
"Us-vs-them" is looking at things the wrong way, I think. I could seesomeone using the same term to describe the fact that the GPL isn't
becoming, say, BSD-like in that it still doesn't allow Microsoft to link
parts of Linux into their proprietary Windows kernel.
If you're going to create a better world, you have to, at times, draw
lines in the sand. This is the difference between public domain and
copyleft.
Misunderstanding of embedded system designers
Posted Jan 19, 2006 20:40 UTC (Thu) by Fats (subscriber, #14882) [Link]
It's not "us-vs-them". What you say is that it is OK to have somebody make a device running a linux kernel but I can't compile a new kernel for that device and run it with the new code. This just doesn't feel right to me and I agree with RMS on this one (which doesn't happen that often). People who don't want to allow that should not use GPL software for their kernel.