So, nVidia is being Cox blocked?
This is simply a slander. It says little about Alan, but much about Michael.Alan has been very vocal about rejecting the NVIDIA-requested change as he doesn't want NVIDIA's binary -- but widely-used -- graphics driver to support the DMA-BUF infrastructure.
It sounds like a lot of people here would rather be using BSD.
It's entirely Nvidia's fault they're in this situation - there's no reason the Linux kernel devs should accommodate them. David was nice enough to write GPL code to solve a need for the kernel, if Nvidia wants the functionality they can play by the rules or they can write their own and ask Intel to use it.
Guys, once again:
Kernel devs did not pick the kernel licence yesterday. They (Linus) picked it more than 20 years ago. They can't change it.
Binary kernel module using internal stuff like DMA-BUF violates the GPL, and nobody would be allowed to distribute that without risking a devastating lawsuit. That's the way it is. Renaming symbols just clarifies this, but does not in any way change the GPL, which prohibits it.
What Nvidia wants is some kind of tacit approval that this violation is "OK" so in the case of a lawsuit they can claim that they were acting in good faith and were misled. What Alan wants is for them to take the responsibility for the violation. If they think that it's legal for them to call kernel code from their binary module, they should simply ignore the symbol names. After all, there's nothing to worry about, right?
Last edited by pingufunkybeat; 10-18-2012 at 12:10 PM.
I don't know if Linus has already taken part in the discussion but if he hasn't then I think he needs to make a decision. I wouldn't normally support closed source but he called on NVIDIA to do something and now they're trying to do the best that they reasonably can and the community is blocking it. I wouldn't be surprised if they turn around and say "well fuck you too."