lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Non-GPL modules

> Perhaps a less blunt tool could be used to encourage people to release
> GPL compatibly licensed code for their previously binary modules? I
> think you risk manufacturers withdrawing the support they have given by
> saying if they don't release their code we won't support anything to do
> with it.

This has been the case for a long time already (so long that I can't
remember
if/when it started:), so how did this change recently ? It didn't...
And vendors who supply binary only modules know already that they get to
do
all the support as rules of the game. That didn't change either.

It's just that it's now easier for the people who get to handle
bugreports
to ask "which modules do you use" as first question if the tainted flag
is set,
instead of spending hours investigating a weird oops.

Greetings,
Arjan van de Ven
(and yes, I do get a fair share of bugreports and really like to know
which
reports I should be suspicious of and ask for module lists etc)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:08    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans