Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Apr 2004 19:53:39 +0200 (CEST) | From | Grzegorz Kulewski <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |