Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:16:13 +0200 (MEST) | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license |
| |
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Timothy Miller wrote: > 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.
And I suggest not to print $MODULE_VENDOR, but `the supplier of $MOD_FOO' to prevent people playing games with $MODULE_VENDOR (e.g. pointing it to lkml).
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
-- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds - 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/
| |