From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261985AbVGEWD2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2005 18:03:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261956AbVGEWBG (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2005 18:01:06 -0400 Received: from zlynx.org ([199.45.143.209]:58126 "EHLO 199.45.143.209") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261946AbVGEVu4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2005 17:50:56 -0400 Subject: Re: A "new driver model" and EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL question From: Zan Lynx To: Greg KH Cc: Michal Jaegermann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20050704054441.GA19936@kroah.com> References: <20050703171202.A7210@mail.harddata.com> <20050704054441.GA19936@kroah.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-D/wdGXQ6zgsL6Ts82/8Q" Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:50:43 -0600 Message-Id: <1120600243.27600.75.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-D/wdGXQ6zgsL6Ts82/8Q Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 22:44 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 05:12:02PM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: [snip] > Then take it up with them. Users of those symbols have had many months > advance notice that this was going to happen. >=20 > > Was a decision to use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL deliberate and if yes then > > what considerations dictated it, other then the patch author wrote > > it that way, and what drivers in question are supposed to use when > > this change will show up in the mainline? It looks that 2.6.13 > > will do this. >=20 > Please see the archives for the answers to these questions. The archives say: Greg KH wrote: > I have been recently advised that I should not change these symbols, > and so I will not. >=20 > Sorry for the noise and wasted bandwidth, will not happen again. >=20 > greg k-h Sourced from here: http://hulllug.principalhosting.net/archive/index.php/t-52440.html That was the way it was as of 2.6.10-mm1 and it stayed that way through 2.6.12. When did that decision change? If it was there in the archives, I missed it in the search. If this was a Greg-only decision, perhaps a patch reversing the change addressed to Linus would get a solid yes/no decision from the top. =46rom what I gather in the archives, the last time this happened it was just a leak from Greg's tree and not an official policy change. It isn't in the feature removal schedule, even though other _GPL changes are listed there. --=20 Zan Lynx --=-D/wdGXQ6zgsL6Ts82/8Q Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCywCzG8fHaOLTWwgRAmI7AKCh1qkxckpurmM3RDEt59ZSsi08uACeM9ld 1aGUFix9Xc3H5q1LuLLSOfw= =9XOS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-D/wdGXQ6zgsL6Ts82/8Q--