Linux 0.97 is under GPL, isn't it?

kmself at kmself at
Tue Oct 31 17:30:46 UTC 2000

on Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 02:23:19PM +0100, Sven Dehmlow privat (sven_dehmlow at wrote:
> Hi,
> Linux 1.0 is under GPL, of course. But is Linux 0.1 is under Linus' "own"
> license. Is Linux 0.97 under GPL?

You can find historic versions of the Linux_ kernel at

The archive may be incomplete -- I see an 0.99.x and 0.96[abc].  No
0.97.  The 0.96 tarball contains no readily apparent COPYING file or
licensing notice, other than Linus's copyright.  It's possible (though I
don't know for certain) that the code has be retroactively included in
the GPL relicensing. 

Why specifically 0.97?

Karsten M. Self <kmself at>
 Evangelist, Opensales, Inc.          
  What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?      There is no K5 cabal
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list