Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261462AbVCaOYX (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:24:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261468AbVCaOYW (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:24:22 -0500 Received: from simmts6.bellnexxia.net ([206.47.199.164]:28598 "EHLO simmts6-srv.bellnexxia.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261462AbVCaOYI (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:24:08 -0500 Message-ID: <4016.10.10.10.24.1112278858.squirrel@linux1.attic.local> In-Reply-To: References: <200503280154.j2S1s9e6009981@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> <1112011441.27381.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1112016850.6003.13.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1112018265.27381.63.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050328154338.753f27e3.pj@engr.sgi.com> <1112055671.3691.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1112059642.3691.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3343.10.10.10.24.1112268948.squirrel@linux1.attic.local> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:20:58 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!. From: "Sean" To: linux-os@analogic.com Cc: "Rik van Riel" , "Steven Rostedt" , "Kyle Moffett" , floam@sh.nu, "LKML" , arjan@infradead.org, "Paul Jackson" , gilbertd@treblig.org, vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl, bunk@stusta.de User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.4-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1039 Lines: 28 On Thu, March 31, 2005 7:34 am, linux-os said: > > Sure it does. Before the GPL-only stuff the only problem one would > have with a proprietary module, i.e., one that didn't contain > the GPL "license" notice, was that the kernel would be marked > "tainted". Everything would still work. > > With the ADDITIONAL RESTRICTION added, the module won't even work > because an ARTIFICIAL CONSTRAINT was added to prevent its use > unless a GPL "license" notice existed. > There are absolutely no additional restrictions for anyone that is in full compliance with the spirit and intent of the GPL. Full Stop. Runtime restrictions do not fall under the GPL anyway, otherwise it would be illegal to impose _any_ security restrictions on a GPL system. You are just DeadWrong(Tm) on this issue. Sean - 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/