Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262388AbUD2Cip (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:38:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262441AbUD2Cip (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:38:45 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:63389 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262388AbUD2Cim (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:38:42 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:38:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@chimarrao.boston.redhat.com To: Ian Stirling cc: Marc Boucher , Timothy Miller , lkml - Kernel Mailing List , Rusty Russell , David Gibson Subject: Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license In-Reply-To: <40906A35.3090004@mauve.plus.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1035 Lines: 25 On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Ian Stirling wrote: > > Your new proposed message sounds much clearer to the ordinary mortal and > > would imho be a significant improvement. Perhaps printing repetitive > > warnings for identical $MODULE_VENDOR strings could also be avoided, > > taking care of the redundancy/volume problem as well.. > > Is this worth 100 or 200 bytes of code though? > I'd have to say no. I suspect it'll be worth it. If only because it'll save the kernel community from people asking things like: "help, my kernel is tainted! what does it mean and how can I fix it?" -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan - 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/