lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license
    On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Chris Friesen wrote:

    > 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...

    Maybe kernel should display warning only once per given licence or even
    once per boot (who needs warning about tainting tainted kernel?)


    Grzegorz Kulewski

    -
    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 14:02    [W:4.000 / U:0.540 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site