On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 8:15 AM Phil Perry <pperry at elrepo.org> wrote: > > On 26/06/2023 11:12, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 9:44 AM Simon Matter <simon.matter at invoca.ch> wrote: > > The kernel is GPL, so "yes", as long as you're willing to make any > > changes you add to the source code available to people who get the > > binaries. Do review the GPL, it's an interesting license. > > However, my understanding is that Red Hat are saying or implying that by > redistributing the source, you are in breach of their T&C's (not the > GPL) and as such they would have the right to terminate your contract > meaning you would no longer have access to said sources. (Please review > the T&Cs you agreed with Red Hat as a paying customer) Wow. I'm staring at the RHEL 9 kernel, and "rpm -qi output: License : GPLv2 and Redistributable, no modification permitted That.... is confusing, and is one of the reasons for the GPLv3. As I understand that particular kernel, it means "you can't modify it and claim new copyrights or licenses". I admit that it's confusing, and a casual reading would discourage people from locally patching and publishing their modified kernels. But I've not published tweaked kernels in years.