Message-ID: <408EA6AB.90508@nortelnetworks.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:30:03 -0400
From: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Marc Boucher <marc@linuxant.com>
CC: Adam Jaskiewicz <ajjaskie@mtu.edu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license
References: <20040427165819.GA23961@valve.mbsi.ca> <408E9771.7020302@mtu.edu> <F55B44BB-9870-11D8-85DF-000A95BCAC26@linuxant.com> <408E9C59.2090502@nortelnetworks.com> <1DCA0B77-9876-11D8-85DF-000A95BCAC26@linuxant.com>
In-Reply-To: <1DCA0B77-9876-11D8-85DF-000A95BCAC26@linuxant.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1022
Lines: 29

Marc Boucher wrote:
> 
> 
> On Apr 27, 2004, at 1:46 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:

>> 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.
> 
> 
> It is a purely technical workaround. There is nothing misleading to the 
> human eye,

modinfo reports a GPL license, and the kernel does not report itself as tainted.  That's misleading.

> and the GPL directory isn't empty; it is included in full in our generic 
> .tar.gz, rpm and
> .deb packages.

My apologies.  I was going on the word of the original poster.

Chris
-
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/