Linux Kernel v2.6.23 Released
diegocgteleline.es writes "After 3 months, Linus has released Linux 2.6.23. This version includes the new and shiny CFS process scheduler, a simpler read-ahead mechanism, the lguest 'Linux-on-Linux' paravirtualization hypervisor, XEN guest support, KVM smp guest support, and variable process argument length. SLUB is now the default slab allocator, there's SELinux protection for exploiting null dereferences using mmap, XFS and ext4 improvements, PPP over L2TP support. Also the 'lumpy' reclaim algorithm, a userspace driver framework, the O_CLOEXEC file descriptor flag, splice improvements, a new fallocate() syscall, lock statistics, support for multiqueue network devices, various new drivers, and many other minor features and fixes. See the changelog for details."
Unless Solaris is released under the GPLv3 and Linus sees some stuff he wants.
Really, he said that.
How we know is more important than what we know.
You can't just relicense code that was GPL2 only. It would all have to be rewritten, from scratch. Linux will NEVER be GPLv3.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
No, the problem is finding *all* the copyright holders and getting them to agree to GPLv3.
The copyright holder can license the code however he damn well pleases.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
What Linus said was "I was impressed in the sense that it was a hell of a lot better than the disaster that were the earlier drafts. I still think GPLv2 is simply the better license."
A couple days later, he expresses more angst with the GPLv3 and the FSF.
The bottom line is I consider dual-licensing unlikely (and technically quite hard), but at least _possible_ in theory. I have yet to see any actual *reasons* for licensing under the GPLv3, though. All I've heard are shrill voices about "tivoization" (which I expressly think is ok) and panicked worries about Novell-MS (which seems way overblown, and quite frankly, the argument seems to not so much be about the Novell deal, as about an excuse to push the GPLv3). So... I'd hardly say, as you did, that he doesn't mind the GPLv3. In fact, the FSF shills really ticked off a lot of kernel devs by trying to berate them into switching to the GPLv3 back in June/July.
Don't leave your mind so open that your brain falls out. Don't close it so much that you cut off the blood.
Dude, if you actually read the kernel mailing list you would know that Linus has said that he can change the license whenever he wants. All he has to do is post a notice to the list, and add the same notice to the license file specifying a date when the license will switch over. Anyone who doesn't agree will have an opportunity to opt-out, at which point their code will be pulled out and rewritten, or opt-in. The ones that don't do either can be assumed to opt-in until such time as they complain.
This has been done before.. with the syscall interface exception.
Stop repeating myths and do some research.
How we know is more important than what we know.
"It takes a specific type of person to get Linux running and to a point where it can be productive even for nontechnical users (which is the majority of users that use computers)"
WTF???
Linux installation for dummies, PHBs and Windows sysadmins (but I repeat myself)
If you can't follow that, print it out and pay some PFY* in grade 9 $20.00 to help you.
(if you don't recognize the reference, you're obviously new here and deserve to be beaten with a clue-by-four, both ways, in the snow, etc...)
Linus has outlined a number of possibilities, a lot more favorable than you are suggesting, but yes, there is no motivation at the current time to change the license.
But that wasn't the point of my post.. the point of my post was to stop the meme that the license can't be changed. It can. Or, at least, Linus has said it can, and that should be good enough, cause if he thinks it can be changed and there is a reason to change it, then he will, and we'll be having a different discussion.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Pipe endpoints are bound together when created, so that might be a problem.
In general, it is safe and legal to kill your children. -- POSIX Programmer's Guide
Not to nitpick, but the milw0rm main page says '2007-09-27' beside that exploit. I'd hardly call that today's Linux news.
...and watch Theo actually turn into a demon.
You do realize that many of the options in the kernel are mutually exclusive? You use the slab or slub allocator...only one of them gets included when the kernel is built.
The CFS scheduler actually *simplifies* the code as compared to the old one, as does the new readahead code.
Sure, the size of the kernel source code is continually increasing, but most of the increase is for hardware drivers. Also, the running binary doesn't increase in size nearly as fast as the source does...and as others have mentioned, you can always turn off the stuff you're not using to shrink it back down.