Replies

"Linux", in order to use it, consists of the kernel and several standard libraries. Without those standard libraries, you've got a kernel that doesn't do anything. All of those libraries that are a standard part of "Linux" (the operating system, as opposed to the kernel) are LGPL. Further, I believe Linus Torvalds has no problem with linking proprietary libraries into the Linux kernel at run time. Compare and contrast with Richard Stallman's views on the LGPL.

I know you are making a technical point but my point is pretty simple here. "Linux", as most people understand it, is an operating system which includes several critical libraries, not just a kernel. If everything included in, say, the Red Hat bundle were pure GPL, you would not have companies like Oracle porting their software to Linux.

Yes - Linux is normally understood to include both the kernel and much user software.

Yes, I was making a technical point.

However I had to make that technical point, to respond to yours. You started with the technical points, by making bogus claims. The legal basis for the kernel's license is not determined by a poll on what most people mean by the word "Linux". It is determined by what is legally part of the copyright kernel source and derived therefrom. User level libraries have nothing to do with that.

You continue to make such bogus claims, when you state:

I believe Linus Torvalds has no problem with linking proprietary libraries into the Linux kernel at run time This is a totally bogus claim. The kernel (what Linus works on) doesn't link libraries at run time. Linus has no position on doing such, because it makes no sense.

If you wish I didn't keep making a technical issue of what is Linux and what isn't, then don't continue to make false claims that stem from a refusal to understand this technical issue.