Re: ndiswrapper and GPL-only symbols redux

Jan Engelhardt
2008-01-30T02:09:19Z

On Jan 29 2008 20:48, Pavel Roskin wrote:
>On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 19:20 -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
>
>> Yes it is. But I thought the existing code was intending to taint the
>> kernel (that's what it does), so it would really help to identify why it
>> tainted the kernel, by calling add_taint_module instead of add_taint. I
>> didn't put the existing match in there...don't shoot the messenger :)
>
>So, it's the same thing as in year 2006. Good intentions, unexpected
>side effects, and a long discussion.

Perhaps module.c needs more comments explaining why the ndis line
is there, and why it's correct and noone should touch it.