[i2c] [RFC] Lifebook apanel driver

Dmitry Torokhov dmitry.torokhov at gmail.com
Thu Jan 4 21:49:15 CET 2007


On 1/4/07, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger at osdl.org> wrote:
>
> From the user's point of view, it makes more sense to see all the input
> options and then have the necessary subsystem selected.  Otherwise if
> I2C is not enabled, the config option doesn't appear on menuconfig.
> But for the difference is minor, and most users will either be knowledgeable
> enough to figure that out or be using distribution kernels, so I really
> don't care whether 'depend' or 'select' is used.
>

I mostly care about my convenience ;) as I try to compile all input
devices and hate to hint for various options throughout menuconfig.

> > >
> > > If you think things should be different, feel free to discuss it on
> > > LKML, send patches etc. but that's not the point here.
> > >
> > > > > > +/*
> > > > > > +    SMBus client for the Fujitsu Lifebook Application Panel
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +    Copyright (C) 2007 Stephen Hemminger <shemminger at osdl.org>
> > > > > > +    Copyright (C) 2001-2003 Jochen Eisinger <jochen at penguin-breeder.org>
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +    This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > > > > > +    it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> > > > > > +    the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> > > > > > +    (at your option) any later version.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually not, the kernel is GPLv2 only.
> > > >
> > > > The kernel as a whole is GPLv2 however individual modules are not
> > > > necessary GPLv2. We have mix of BSD, GPLv2 and GPLv2+. It is up to the
> > > > author to decide.
> > >
> > > Ah, I never realized that. So I must stop asking contributors to change
> > > that, thanks for letting me know.
> > >
> > > Now, I get to wonder what it really means in practice when Linus claims
> > > loudly that "Linux is GPL v2 only", while 99% of the drivers have their
> > > license set to "GPL" and not "GPL v2".
> > >
> >
> > In my limited understanding (not a lawyer) you can take all the code
> > released under GPLv2+, replace the parts that are GPLv2 only and
> > release Jeanux under GPLv3 ;)
> > It is all becomes a little muddied with patches applied on top that do
> > not specify license. It could be argued that since general kernel
> > revision is V2 any patches are V2 only. One also argue that if person
> > submitting patch wishes that the resulting code can be distributed as
> > V2 only he/she should change license notice on the file in question.
> >
>
> Original code had GPL v2 only tag, and at present I have don't want to
> touch GPL v3 issues.
>

Ok, then "any later versions" was clearly added by mistake and you as
the author need to remove it. I was just saying that we should not
demand GPLv2 only licensing.

-- 
Dmitry



More information about the i2c mailing list