Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264871AbUD2VeD (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Apr 2004 17:34:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264989AbUD2VeC (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Apr 2004 17:34:02 -0400 Received: from kinesis.swishmail.com ([209.10.110.86]:27921 "EHLO kinesis.swishmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264871AbUD2VcZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Apr 2004 17:32:25 -0400 Message-ID: <4091757B.3090209@techsource.com> Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 17:36:59 -0400 From: Timothy Miller MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Wagland CC: Rik van Riel , lkml - Kernel Mailing List , Rusty Russell , David Gibson , Marc Boucher Subject: Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license References: <4FE43C97-9A20-11D8-B804-000A95CD704C@wagland.net> In-Reply-To: <4FE43C97-9A20-11D8-B804-000A95CD704C@wagland.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1624 Lines: 47 Paul Wagland wrote: > > On Apr 29, 2004, at 17:14, Rik van Riel wrote: > >> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Timothy Miller wrote: >> >>>> "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. >> >> >> More importantly, it directs the support burden to where >> it, IMHO, belongs. > > > Just to throw in my two cents at the end of this long debate... :-) > > I heartily endorse (for what little that is worth ;-) the change in > text. It adds clarity, it provides more information as to where to go > for information. It is hard to misconstrue as a message of impending > doom, consider that a good synonym for tainted is corrupted, and a > corrupted kernel is a bad thing :-). > > Cheers, > Paul While we're on all of this, are we going to change "tained" to some other less alarmist word? Say there is a /proc file or some report that you can generate about the kernel that simply wants to indicate that the kernel contains closed-source modules, and we want to use a short, concise word like "tainted" for this. "An untrusted module has been loaded into this kernel" would be just a bit too long to qualify. Hmmm... how about "untrusted"? Not sure... - 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/