<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7655.10">
<TITLE>Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: export ppc_tb_freq so that modules can reference it</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Josh Boyer wrote:<BR>
> It is not, in my opinion, about what is technically possible and what<BR>
> isn't. The kernel is licensed under the GPL. This is a Linux kernel<BR>
> only symbol. One would be hard pressed to claim they have a driver<BR>
> that wasn't written for Linux that happens to need that symbol. As a<BR>
> member of the Linux kernel community, I find it important to encourage<BR>
> the contribution of code back to the kernel, and this is one way to<BR>
> help that. This isn't BSD.<BR>
<BR>
Fine, but this goes back to my original question -- if this is how the<BR>
community feels, then why hasn't someone posted a patch that converts all<BR>
EXPORT_SYMBOL into EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL?<BR>
<BR>
Either we allow non-GPL drivers, or we don't. If we don't, then we need to<BR>
eliminate EXPORT_SYMBOL once and for all. Otherwise, the message is<BR>
hypocritical.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
--<BR>
Timur Tabi<BR>
Linux kernel developer<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>