lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 27 Apr 2004 13:46:01 -0400
FromChris Friesen <>
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license
Marc Boucher wrote:

> On Apr 27, 2004, at 1:25 PM, Adam Jaskiewicz wrote:

>> Would it not be better to simply place a notice in the readme 
>> explaining what
>> the error messages mean, rather than working around the liscense checking
>> code? Educate the users, rather than fibbing.
> 
> 
> Good idea. We will try to clarify the matter in the docs for the next 
> release.
> A lot of users don't read them though, so a proper fix remains necessary..

Does your company honestly feel that misleading the module loading tools is actually the proper way 
to work around the issue of repetitive warning messages?  This is blatently misleading and does not 
reflect well, especially when the "GPL" directory mentioned in the source string is actually empty.

A "proper fix" begins with not attempting to mislead the kernel/tools about the license...

Chris

-
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 13:02    [from the cache]
©2003-2008