From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 08:23:52 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Subject: Re: 2.6.0-test10-mm1 Message-ID: <11470000.1069863830@[10.10.2.4]> In-Reply-To: <20031126132505.C5477@infradead.org> References: <20031125211518.6f656d73.akpm@osdl.org> <20031126085123.A1952@infradead.org> <20031126044251.3b8309c1.akpm@osdl.org> <20031126130936.A5275@infradead.org> <20031126052900.17542bb3.akpm@osdl.org> <20031126132505.C5477@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 05:29:00AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: >> But I do not think that making a single kernel symbol inaccessible is an >> appropriate way of resolving a GPFS licensing dispute. > > well, GFPS is a derived work with or without it. It's just that I remember > we had that agreement about merging it only with the _GPL export. In fact > I'm pretty sure Paul told something about GPLed distributed filesystems from > IBM in that context.. IBM has (at the very least) 2 clustered filesystems that use this. One is GPL'ed, the other (GPFS) is not. M. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: aart@kvack.org