![[ Register ]](/images/navbar/register.gif)
![[ Applications ]](/images/navbar/applications.gif)
![[ Documentation ]](/images/navbar/documentation.gif)
![[ Distributions ]](/images/navbar/distributions.gif)
![[ Download Info ]](/images/navbar/download.gif)
![[ General Info ]](/images/navbar/geninfo.gif)
![[ Book Store ]](/images/navbar/bookstore.gif)
![[ Courses ]](/images/navbar/courses.gif)
![[ News ]](/images/navbar/news.gif)
![[ People ]](/images/navbar/people.gif)
![[ Hardware ]](/images/navbar/hardware.gif)
![[ Vendors ]](/images/navbar/vendors.gif)
![[ Projects ]](/images/navbar/projects.gif)
![[ Events ]](/images/navbar/events.gif)
![[ User Groups ]](/images/navbar/usergroups.gif)
![[ User Area ]](/images/navbar/user_area.gif)
![[ About Us ]](/images/navbar/aboutus.gif)
![[ Home Page ]](/images/navbar/homepage.gif)
![[ Advertise ]](/images/navbar/advertise.gif) |
| Microsoft aims to be a Linux kernel contributor: What's in it for them? |
|---|
First, when I say the “official” Linux kernel, I’m referring to the main, or upstream, kernel and not the variations based upon it that constitute the kernels of different distributions of Linux: i.e., Ubuntu, Fedora, etc. Next, I want to explain a little about the licensing options. The Microsoft code is being released under the GNU General Public License version 2. This makes sense on two fronts: first the Linux kernel itself has never adopted the GPLv3 for a number of reasons, and is released under the GPLv2.
|
 |
|
