Originally Posted by metalfan78
So what you're basically saying is that Samsung screwed the pooch?
Not at all. I'm saying that Samsung is playing fast and loose with the GPL. The MK3 kernel source contains any number of tricks to keep it from building correctly unless Samsung is building it themselves. Without patching it, exFAT support is (silently) skipped, the a2220 driver uses AT&T's firmware instead of Sprint's, and there's likely a few more bugs affecting the a2220 and video drivers (and possibly others as well).
EDIT: To clarify, some of the source code uses magic #define macros and directory layouts in order to change how it's built. Without being built by Samsung's build tree, that magic is missing and the resulting kernel isn't functionally equivalent to the kernel Samsung provided. GPLv2 doesn't explicitly forbid this, so they're technically compliant.