Messages in this thread |  | | From | "Albert D. Cahalan" <> | Subject | Re: Tainting kernels for non-GPL or forced modules | Date | Sat, 22 Sep 2001 16:28:48 -0400 (EDT) |
| |
Keith Owens writes:
> I have started work on the patch for /proc/sys/kernel/tainted with the > corresponding modutils and ksymoops changes. insmod of a non-GPL > module ORs /proc/sys/kernel/tainted with 1, insmod -f ORs with 2.
So now these will taint the kernel?
LGPL 2-clause BSD X11 public domain
They are all non-GPL.
> What to do about modules with no license? Complain and taint or > silently ignore? A lot of modules in -ac14 have no MODULE_LICENSE, > probably because they have no MODULE_AUTHOR. IMHO the default should > be complain and taint, even though it will generate lots of newbie > questions to l-k.
Give them separate bits.
0x00000001 unknown license 0x00000002 fully GPL-compatible license (GPL, LGPL, 2-clause BSD, X11) 0x00000004 other certified "Open Source" license (MPL, 4-clause BSD) 0x00000008 source available, but w/o certified "Open Source" licensing 0x00000010 no source available 0x00000020 non-redistributable binary 0x10000000 any module at all (prove that user did load a module) 0x20000000 insmod -f 0x40000000 hacked in, using System.map 0x80000000 hacked in with unresolved references
- 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/
|  |