Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license

Ian Stirling
2004-04-29T02:47:52Z

Rik van Riel wrote:
> 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?"

Sorry.
I meant adding code to suppress warnings, not the expanded warning, which is sensible.