Lines Matching full:kernel
9 The rest of this section covers the scope of the kernel development process
11 encounter there. There are a great many reasons why kernel code should be
12 merged into the official ("mainline") kernel, including automatic
14 influence the direction of kernel development. Code contributed to the
15 Linux kernel must be made available under a GPL-compatible license.
17 :ref:`development_process` introduces the development process, the kernel
21 with kernel development are encouraged to track down and fix bugs as an
30 which can help to ensure that kernel patches are correct.
48 for more information on kernel development.
53 The Linux kernel, at over 8 million lines of code and well over 1000
56 kernel has evolved into a best-of-breed operating system component which
69 kernel. And end users, too, will often wish to change Linux to make it
76 process. But, if anything, the kernel is even more open than most other
77 free software projects. A typical three-month kernel development cycle can
81 Working with the kernel development community is not especially hard. But,
83 difficulties when trying to do kernel work. The kernel community has
87 surprising that Linux kernel development process differs greatly from
90 The kernel's development process may come across as strange and
92 experience behind it. A developer who does not understand the kernel
101 community is always in need of developers who will help to make the kernel
121 learning how to work with the kernel community and get their code into the
122 mainline kernel (the "mainline" being the kernel maintained by Linus
129 relevant aspects of the kernel development process; most of these will be
132 - Code which has been merged into the mainline kernel is available to all
139 - While kernel developers strive to maintain a stable interface to user
140 space, the internal kernel API is in constant flux. The lack of a stable
154 - Beyond that, code which is in the kernel will often be improved by other
158 - Kernel code is subjected to review, both before and after merging into
167 direction of kernel development. Users who complain from the sidelines
169 to implement changes which make the kernel work better for their needs.
181 the kernel and provide capabilities and examples which are of use to
182 other kernel developers. If you have developed code for Linux (or are
187 All of the reasoning above applies to any out-of-tree kernel code,
190 before considering any sort of binary-only kernel code distribution. These
193 - The legal issues around the distribution of proprietary kernel modules
194 are cloudy at best; quite a few kernel copyright holders believe that
195 most binary-only modules are derived products of the kernel and that, as
203 - Binary modules greatly increase the difficulty of debugging kernel
204 problems, to the point that most kernel developers will not even try. So
209 provide a version of the module for every distribution and every kernel
213 kernel.
222 a self-contained product which uses a frozen kernel version and requires no
233 Code is contributed to the Linux kernel under a number of licenses, but all
235 (GPLv2), which is the license covering the kernel distribution as a whole.
240 kernel.
243 to the kernel. All code merged into the mainline kernel retains its
244 original ownership; as a result, the kernel now has thousands of owners.
247 the licensing of the kernel is doomed to almost certain failure. There are
249 be obtained (or their code removed from the kernel). So, in particular,
253 It is imperative that all code contributed to the kernel be legitimately
257 kernel under the GPL. Code which has not been licensed as free software by
259 kernel (such as code which derives from reverse-engineering efforts lacking