Only binary distributions thereof. See the section called &quot;Is The Analysis Different With Source-Only Distribution?&quot;:<p><i>Pure distribution of source with no binaries is undeniably different. When distributing source code and no binaries, requirements in those sections of GPLv2 and CDDLv1 that cover modification and&#x2F;or binary (or “Executable”, as CDDLv1 calls it) distribution do not activate. Therefore, the analysis is simpler, and we find no specific clause in either license that prohibits source-only redistribution of Linux and ZFS, even on the same distribution media.</i><p>(Conservancy mentions the possibility of contributory&#x2F;indirect infringement, though. Also, proprietary kernel modules written specifically for Linux, or using Linux-specific kernel features, may be GPL violations by virtue of <i>their source code</i> being a derivative work. But in the case of ZFS and several other cases such as OpenAFS and many hardware drivers, the source code is not a derivative work of Linux.)