lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 29 Apr 2004 11:15:13 -0400
FromTimothy Miller <>
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license

Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004, Marc Boucher wrote:
> 
> 
>>At the same time, I think that the "community" should, without 
>>relinquishing its principles, be less eager before getting the facts to 
>>attack people and companies trying to help in good faith, and be more 
>>realistic when it comes to satisfying practical needs of ordinary 
>>users.
> 
> 
> I wouldn't be averse to changing the text the kernel prints
> when loading a module with an incompatible license. If the
> text "$MOD_FOO: module license '$BLAH' taints kernel." upsets
> the users, it's easy enough to change it.
> 
> How about the following?
> 
> "Due to $MOD_FOO's license ($BLAH), the Linux kernel community
> cannot resolve problems you may encounter. Please contact
> $MODULE_VENDOR for support issues."


Sounds very "politically correct", but certainly more descriptive and 
less alarming.

-
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