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

Horst von Brand
2004-04-30T20:37:10Z

Keith D Burgess Jr <kburgessjr@mailblocks.com> said:
> A couple days ago when I stumbled onto this discussion, I was prompted
> to at least post an opinion from a user perspective. Having followed
> along since then, I am beginning to wonder why I am so interested in
> the Linux community in the first place. I have to admit, my chin is
> still on the floor having read some of the personal attacks directed
> towards Marc. Why, for some, has this become a personal issue and not a
> technical one? I think Marc summed it up best (a few times) by saying:
>
> >> I repeat, the \0 is purely a technical workaround, done without any
> >> mischievous intent.

Exactly the same way a lockpick is a "purely technical workaround" for
doors the owner "accidentally" locked...

> Can't we respect this as his explanation and move on so these efforts
> can be better directed towards improving the kernel?

Very true.

> Hell - Marc has
> alot of work to-do in order for driverloader to be compatible with 4K
> stacks ;)

His efforts should better be directed at getting real (open source) support
in place. But it is his calling in the end, I don't presume to decide what
he should do with his time. As long as the relevant licenses (and hopefully
also the wishes of the creators of the kernel) are respected.
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513