Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264746AbUD3QAE (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Apr 2004 12:00:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265096AbUD3QAD (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Apr 2004 12:00:03 -0400 Received: from [195.23.16.24] ([195.23.16.24]:11992 "EHLO bipbip.comserver-pie.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264746AbUD3P7l (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:59:41 -0400 Message-ID: <40927769.3020100@grupopie.com> Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 16:57:29 +0100 From: Paulo Marques Organization: GrupoPIE User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020508 Netscape6/6.2.3 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marc Boucher Cc: Rik van Riel , Timothy Miller , lkml - Kernel Mailing List , Rusty Russell , David Gibson Subject: Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license References: <4150E18A-9985-11D8-85DF-000A95BCAC26@linuxant.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiVirus: checked by Vexira MailArmor (version: 2.0.1.16; VAE: 6.25.0.3; VDF: 6.25.0.40; host: bipbip) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2473 Lines: 58 Marc Boucher wrote: > > Hi Rik, > > 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.. I'm one of the first persons who posted to this thread, and I'm starting to regret that I did. I believe Marc did the GPL\0 trick just to avoid the warnings. It was wrong to do it and he already apologised. IMHO writing a more descriptive message and not issuing the tainting warning more than once *at all*, seems pretty harmless and would solve problems for everyone and we could just move on with our lifes (this thread has almost 150 posts now!) The only problem with reporting only once would be to have remove one module at a time and rebooting until untainting. In my opinion, if your system is so out of control that you don't know what modules are tainting it, you deserve to have make 3 reboots to remove 3 modules :) Some people feel that Linuxant isn't helping the comunnity because hardware manufacturers won't feel obligated to release open source drivers if thay have a closed source alternative. IMHO what makes manufacturers care about Linux is market share. Until we have a fair market share, manufacturers won't bother developing for Linux, because their return on this effort will be minimal. Linuxant is in fact helping Linux geting a bigger market share. Anyway, as everyone on this list I strongly prefer open-source drivers. Users prefer open-source drivers, specially if they already come with their distribution and just work out-of-the-box. So if the hardware manufacturers start caring about linux (because of the increased market share), they will release open source drivers. Just look at the manufacturers that produce hardware for high-end servers (where the Linux market share is already very high). Network cards, RAID controllers, etc., already have open source drivers, because of this. Linux is taking over, it is just a matter of time now :) -- Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com "In a world without walls and fences who needs windows and gates?" - 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/