Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sun, 10 Jun 2001 06:38:20 +0200 (CEST) | | From | Mike Galbraith <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sockreg2.4.5-05 inet[6]_create() register/unregistertable |
| |
On Sat, 9 Jun 2001, watermodem wrote:
> Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, watermodem wrote: > > > > > "David S. Miller" wrote: > > > > > > > > George Bonser writes: > > > > > There is, of course, one basic problem with that argument. While you can say > > > > > (and probably rightly so) that such a change would not be included in Linus' > > > > > kernel, I think anyone is allowed to post a patch that might make it > > > > > possible to add protocols as modules. If anyone chooses to use it is each > > > > > individual's decision but you could not prevent ACME from creating a patch > > > > > that allows protocol modules as long as they distributed the patch. Also, I > > > > > know that you are allowed to distribute proprietary modules in binary form > > > > > but are there any restrictions on what function these modules can perform? > > > > > I don't remember seeing any such restrictions. > > > > > > > > People can post whatever patches which do whatever, sure. > > > > But this isn't what matters. > > > > > > > > What matters is the API under which a binary-only module may interface > > > > to the kernel. Linus specifies that only the module exports in his > > > > tree fall into this API. > > > > > > > > As I stated in another email, the allowance of binary-only kernel > > > > modules is a special exception to the licensing of the kernel made by > > > > Linus. The GPL by itself, does not allow this at all. > > > > > > > > Later, > > > > David S. Miller > > > > davem@redhat.com > > > > > > David, > > > > > > What is your real problem with La Monte's Code. > > > I don't buy your more "blessed than thou" argument. > > > It is a typical response one normally sees in large > > > organizations from folk with "empires" to protect. > > > Coming from the "land of warring tribes" firm it is > > > a attitude I have seen often. My response is take > > > a vacation, chill out and reassess. > > > > What words would you like to put in his mouth to replace those he used? > > > > -Mike > No words..... Just suggesting to calm down for awhile before getting > into a flame-war. I am old enough to know that nothing is lost by > considering your words before painting yourself into a corner you may > not want to occupy in the future.
There is a rather amusing contradiction present in these new words.. your first words were ill chosen to the point of being offensive.
I've said what I had to say, so consider yourself flamed.
-Mike
- 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/
|  |