From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261194AbVFUMAu (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:00:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261326AbVFUL7g (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2005 07:59:36 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:25809 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261280AbVFULz1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2005 07:55:27 -0400 Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 07:55:16 -0400 From: Dave Jones To: "Richard B. Johnson" Cc: Linux kernel Subject: Re: Linux-2.6.12 Message-ID: <20050621115516.GC592@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , "Richard B. Johnson" , Linux kernel References: <20050621003203.GB28908@redhat.com> <20050621111301.GA592@redhat.com> <20050621113040.GB592@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 07:36:21AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jun 2005, Dave Jones wrote: > > >On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 07:17:55AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > >> >> Bullshit. The source is available to anybody who wants it. > >> >Great. Then please explain why you pull off this kind of crap.. > >> >(DataLink/license.c) > >> Because it's true. > > > >kernel/module.c:1259 disagrees with you. > > > >static inline int license_is_gpl_compatible(const char *license) > >{ > > return (strcmp(license, "GPL") == 0 > > || strcmp(license, "GPL v2") == 0 > > || strcmp(license, "GPL and additional rights") == 0 > > || strcmp(license, "Dual BSD/GPL") == 0 > > || strcmp(license, "Dual MPL/GPL") == 0); > >} > > > >> >MODULE_LICENSE("GPL\0 They won't allow GPL/BSD anymore!"); > > > >AFAICS, this is just plain deception. I suggest reading > >http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=108304056922350&w=2 > >especially the part about talking to lawyers. > > > > Dave > > > > At the time the work-around was inserted it was FACT. According to the RCS file in the tarball you sent, license.c was written on 2004.11.09.16.54.17; It most certainly was around back then. > I don't > spend my time rewriting license strings to accommodate the > whims of the latest GPL fanatic, thank you. So I see. So instead you subvert the checks instead. btw, text like this.. * # C O N F I D E N T I A L # * # The information contained in or upon this document is the # * # property of Analogic Corporation and is considered to be # * # proprietary and may not be used by any recipient without # * # the specific written permission of Analogic Corporation. # Just fills me with confidence about the GPL'd nature of this driver. Due to the "C O N F I D E N T I A L" nature of this driver, I've stopped reading. Pity, datalink.c was quite amusing. * Changed a lot of code to accommodate the stupid and sometimes * downright wrong changes to the Linux kernel that occurred in * Version 2.6.n. * * Yes. It's broken. I had to hard-code a bunch of stuff using * "#define" where previously the kernel provided a logical * value. Dave