Hyper-V drivers for Linux Kernel.. Yay!

aueddonline

Microsoft stuns Linux world, submits source code for kernel - Network World

"The code will become part of the 2.6.30.1 stable release."

JDMurray

Well, that gets my vote for "Most misleading tech headline of 2009." It's the Hyper-V kernel and not the kernel you first think of when you read that line.

I really like the line, "Linux backers hailed the submission as validation of the Linux development model and the Linux GPLv2 licensing." It should be followed by, "Microsoft backers hailed he Linux development model and the Linux GPLv2 licensing as a way to (eventually) get Linux users to pay for Microsoft products." Get 'em hooked on the free stuff and then they'll pay for the good stuff they really need. Microsoft is learning form VMWare, it seems.

shon541

Doesn't look like they were really embracing GPLv2.

Microsoft opened Linux-driver code after 'violating' GPL ? The Register

JDMurray

There are any number of variations of the GPL that Microsoft can claim to be using. MS should have just created its own Microsoft Open Source Licensing Agreement (MOSLA) and released the Hyper-V drivers under it.

Hyper-Me

JDMurray wrote: »

There are any number of variations of the GPL that Microsoft can claim to be using. MS should have just created its own Microsoft Open Source Licensing Agreement (MOSLA) and released the Hyper-V drivers under it.

I guess they should have. Linux users complain at microsoft for years for not being interoperable and now that they made an effort to do so, they get yelled at for that too.

astorrs

JDMurray wrote: »

There are any number of variations of the GPL that Microsoft can claim to be using. MS should have just created its own Microsoft Open Source Licensing Agreement (MOSLA) and released the Hyper-V drivers under it.

That would have been illegal too, they had to release it under GPL since some of the driver contained GPL code (the "any GPL all GPL" rule ).

JDMurray

astorrs wrote: »

That would have been illegal too, they had to release it under GPL since some of the driver contained GPL code (the "any GPL all GPL" rule ).

That would be incredibly stupid if the drivers themselves do contain GPL code. Non-GPL code can use GPL code without triggering licensing issues by the use of a "shim." I myself have integrated GPL code and programs into commercial software packages using shims that I've built and published. If MS is using GPL code in any way this is probably how they are doing it.

astorrs

Stupid indeed.

This saga started when one of the user's on the Vyatta forum inquired about supporting Hyper-V network driver in the Vyatta kernel. A little googling found the necessary drivers, but on closer examination there was a problem. The driver had both open-source components which were under GPL, and statically linked to several binary parts. The GPL does not permit mixing of closed and open source parts, so this was an obvious violation of the license.

Network Plumber's Journal: Congratulations Microsoft

JDMurray

Once again, the use of shims does permit the static linking of GPL and non-GPL parts in a way that does not violate the GPL license--although many, rabidly pro-GPL people will deny this. I don't think fear of prosecution by Open Source-funded lawyers is the reason for MS releasing the Hyper-V drivers under GPLv2. Instead, it's a way to better integrate Microsoft products into the technology of Linux-minded people.