Salut,
If this is compiled as a module and then loaded, the kernel is tainted
because of a missing module license.
Also, according to many european laws, software which is released
under no license must not be used.
More on this patch can be found at
<URL:http://keepsake.keepsake.ch/~thunder/noyau/2.6.0-test11-ta1/hfcpci_license.xml>
Thunder
diff -Nur linux-2.6.0-test9-mm3/drivers/isdn/hisax/hisax_hfcpci.c linux-2.6.0-test9-mm3-ta1/drivers/isdn/hisax/hisax_hfcpci.c
--- linux-2.6.0-test9-mm3/drivers/isdn/hisax/hisax_hfcpci.c 2003-10-08 21:24:04.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.0-test9-mm3-ta1/drivers/isdn/hisax/hisax_hfcpci.c 2003-11-24 13:30:53.000000000 +0100
@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@
MODULE_PARM(debug, "i");
#endif
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
MODULE_AUTHOR("Kai Germaschewski <[email protected]>/Werner Cornelius <[email protected]>");
MODULE_DESCRIPTION("HFC PCI ISDN driver");
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 03:00:03 +0100, Tonnerre Anklin <[email protected]> said:
> If this is compiled as a module and then loaded, the kernel is tainted
> because of a missing module license.
True. However..
> Also, according to many european laws, software which is released
> under no license must not be used.
No way to verify this. I mostly understand the US copyright code as
it impacts my work, but have no idea what the other side of that puddle
does legally (and for that matter, I don't claim to know what the other
side of the other, even bigger, puddle is)...
> <URL:http://keepsake.keepsake.ch/~thunder/noyau/2.6.0-test11-ta1/hfcpci_license.xml>
which says: "I guess the license is meant to be GPL." And so it was almost
certainly intended to be.
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Kai Germaschewski <[email protected]>/Werner Cornelius <[email protected]>");
Unfortunately, neither you nor I nor anybody but Kai or Werner (or their
assignees) can do this, as I understand the law. The only proper resolutions
here are to get one of them to make some sort of statement (I suspect even a
"Yea, it's GPL, we just forgot the macro" e-mail from one of them would be good
enough), or to pull the code out of the 2.6.0 tree till it *is* resolved.
(Sorry to be a stickler, but this is the sort of thing that Darl and
company would love to make a point about - we *do* need to keep careful
track of the actual source and license status of every line....)
Kai? Werner? You out there?
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 [email protected] wrote:
> which says: "I guess the license is meant to be GPL." And so it was almost
> certainly intended to be.
>
> > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> > MODULE_AUTHOR("Kai Germaschewski <[email protected]>/Werner Cornelius <[email protected]>");
>
>
> Unfortunately, neither you nor I nor anybody but Kai or Werner (or their
> assignees) can do this, as I understand the law. The only proper resolutions
> here are to get one of them to make some sort of statement (I suspect even a
> "Yea, it's GPL, we just forgot the macro" e-mail from one of them would be good
> enough), or to pull the code out of the 2.6.0 tree till it *is* resolved.
Yes, it's GPL, it actually even says so in the comment at the beginning of
the file. It's based on Werner's original driver which was GPL, and the
work I contributed to the Linux kernel is GPL too, of course.
--Kai
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 18:40:32 EST, Kai Germaschewski said:
> Yes, it's GPL, it actually even says so in the comment at the beginning of
> the file. It's based on Werner's original driver which was GPL, and the
> work I contributed to the Linux kernel is GPL too, of course.
OK.. Works for me. :)