Initramfs status [LWN.net]

Initramfs status

Posted Feb 6, 2003 3:48 UTC (Thu) by gregkh (subscriber, #8)
Parent article: Initramfs status

Just to set the record straight, I did not write the current version of
klibc. That work was done by Peter Anvin, and others. I had originally
written a first cut at klibc, but that was under the GPL, and it was
determined that a BSD style license would be better. Peter then started
from scratch and created a very small and complete library, and took the
klibc name (which was fine with me). I am merely trying to add klibc to
the kernel build process.

(Log in to post comments)

why not GPL?

Posted Feb 6, 2003 18:57 UTC (Thu) by pflugstad (subscriber, #224) [Link]

What issues does the GPL run into here?

Also, is this a "shared" (i.e. .so), so multiple boot programs get
one copy, or is it your standard library (.a)? The former would
almost seem to be a requirement from a size point of view.

Thanks,
Pete

Re: why not GPL?

Posted Feb 7, 2003 6:16 UTC (Fri) by larryr (guest, #4030) [Link]

> is this a "shared" (i.e. .so)

I think it is in effect a shared object, but there is some magic to do it.

> What issues does the GPL run into here?

I think only GPL-compatible programs can link with GPL libraries, and
that is too restrictive for the klibc requirements.

Larry