Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: Yes, most Linux distributions are forks.

Author:David Adams
Posted:8/24/2000; 9:54:06 PM
Topic:Next survey: Are you an open source developer?
Msg #:20156 (In response to 20153)
Prev/Next:20155 / 20157

So, yes -- the Linux kernel itself has forked.

The reason why this is done via modules is because of the particular version of the GPL under which Linux is licensed. While the vendors must share their changes to the static part of the kernel, they can fork it via loadable modules, and so they do. And they do it this way specifically because of the license.

I don't understand. Even if I agreed with you that the kernel has forked, you admit that the GPLed part hasn't. If the static part of the kernel was distributed under some less restrictive license, the situation would be far worse, wouldn't it? At the least, it wouldn't be any better: all the interested parties who now release closed, or at least differently-licensed modules, would have made their changes to the kernel itself without revealing their changes. How is this any different, if it isn't worse? With modules, I can remove one and replace it with another relatively easily, especially compared with replacing the whole kernel with another from some other group!

The distributions and various drivers may not be compatible with each other, but they aren't what is GPLed. The core Linux kernel is GPLed, and it hasn't forked. Ultimately, in my opinion, the license doesn't have anything to do with it. Parties who aren't interested in cooperating with each other will ultimately fork anything, be it GPLed, BSDed, or totally closed.

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:15 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.